Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Printable Version
+- SeekGod.ca Discussion Forum (http://www.seekgod.ca/forum)
+-- Forum: Discussion Boards (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Messianic Judaism / Hebrew Roots or Hebraic Roots (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? (/showthread.php?tid=37)
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - aahavaa - 01-07-2009 07:36 PM
Quote:What about eating --do you keep all the kosher laws every day, every meal, snack, restuarant you eat at?
I read that and did a :shocked:
I thought you werent into home cooking and ate a lot of prepared meals and takeaways.Didnt know they were from kosher takeaways though.
And I recall you never even kept the dietary laws pertaining to Passover and feast of Unleavened bread.I remember last Passover we got together remember and did the last supper remembrance thing and funnily enough I used matza but you used normal shopbought bread if I recall. And Im sure you didn’t buy Kosher for Passover wine.:shameonyou:
Now either Ive got very bad amnesia or I didn’t read the above quote correctly.
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - malawk - 01-07-2009 08:16 PM
Hey aahavaa, I'm sure you remember me cooking a few times for my brothers and I no? as to kosher what Vic asked i took that as meaning the certain animals in lev 11 and not the other food laws like the feast of unleavened bread, perhaps "kosher" means different things to different people but the animals is how I took the question. You probably remember last passover also me not wanting to eat or drink cause of this verse knowing my own uncleanliness.
1Cr 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink [this] cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 1Cr 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup.
1Cr 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
Your memory maybe better then mine, I do remember you mentioning the ml amount you had but not the exact quanitity it was a small bottle that you bought that I remember, and yup I remember I had regular store bought bread now that you mention it, with leaven.
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Rose of Shushan - 01-07-2009 08:56 PM
Deu 30:1 And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call [them] to mind among all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath driven thee,
Assyria and Babylon, that’s the two nations into which they were driven.
Deu 30:2 And shalt return unto the LORD thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thine heart, and with all thy soul;
Deu 30:4 If [any] of thine be driven out unto the outmost [parts] of heaven, from thence will the LORD thy God gather thee, and from thence will he fetch thee:
Deu 30:5 And the LORD thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it; and he will do thee good, and multiply thee above thy fathers.
Deu 30:6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.
Moses here sees what will befall the people in the future when they fail to heed the words of the covenant and are scattered into the nations.He also sees what will happen even after that when God will have mercy and cut a new covenant with those who returned from the captivities.
Deu 30:7 And the LORD thy God will put all these curses upon thine enemies, and on them that hate thee, which persecuted thee.
Deu 30:8 And thou shalt return and obey the voice of the LORD, and do all his commandments which I command thee this day
Deu 30:9 And the LORD thy God will make thee plenteous in every work of thine hand, in the fruit of thy body, and in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy land, for good: for the LORD will again rejoice over thee for good, as he rejoiced over thy fathers
This did happen after they returned from Babylon.God blessed them and the land and they did observe the commandments once again.
Yes they took great care to observe the letter of the law as we saw with the Pharisees but still their hearts weren’t in it.
Deu 30:10 If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the law, [and] if thou turn unto the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.
Quote:Is not the above refference of God curcimsising the children of Israels heart in refference to Christ? personally I believe it is, perhaps you believe differently not sure, if though Moses here is prophesying of Christ and the new covenant what are we to make of the rest of the prophecy which entails the children of Israel obeying everything which Moses commanded them "this day"?
That prophecy was fulfilled after they returned from Babylon,they observed the commandments but even so they did not keep all the commandments and if you notice all the ifs in the pssage,the covenant was conditional on their obedience,in which they failed.So God had to cut a new covenant with them.
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Vic - 01-07-2009 10:04 PM
Greg, if you don't keep the law of Moses, nor do you advocate that it must be kept and it is in fact not in force and not part of the New Covenant--would you please make that clear statement?
As Malawk, I am familiar with you from Messianic Apologetic, and also Paltalk. I saw you there myself. I am somewhat familiar with some of the company you keep there, including those who openly despise Christians. Are you there protesting those beliefs, Malawk?
So---are your continual statements re the law, concerning Ephraim, the sheet vision not including animals and similar, suggesting you are not only advocating keeping the mosaic law--but you attempt to keep it? It not only looks like a duck, it sounds like one Greg. And if you attempt to keep it Greg, we've been through the verses regarding that--to not keep it all places you under the curse of the law.
Now if I am inaccurate in your advocating keeping the law, then all you need to do is state you take the Christian view of the NT, the New Covenant and Christ and doubt nothing in it, and do not advocate the Hebrew Roots view or Messianic view which presents itself as law bound--not all but many.
And can you clearly state that you definitely reject the error of the lost tribes, ephraim/two house/ british israel beliefs and totally reject any implied anti semitism found within those teachings?
(1) O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
(2) This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
(3) Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - malawk - 01-07-2009 11:23 PM
Quote: Greg, if you don't keep the law of Moses, nor do you advocate that it must be kept and it is in fact not in force and not part of the New Covenant--would you please make that clear statement?
This again is a loaded question Vic, but I'll try and answer it for you, when you say "law of Moses" here I am guessing that you mean the law of Moses in its entirity in its full and as to if I keep it all entirely of course the question is no.
Do I advocate the keeping of the law of Moses in its entirity (I believe this is what you mean) then the answer is no again.
Partially yes on both of these though, one cannot help but advocate parts of the law of Moses since Jesus Himself quotes from it to all believers.
Quote:As Malawk, I am familiar with you from Messianic Apologetic, and also Paltalk. I saw you there myself. I am somewhat familiar with some of the company you keep there, including those who openly despise Christians. Are you there protesting those beliefs, Malawk?
Messianic Appologetic I am still recieving emails from but haven't posted there in years if at all its been so long, paltalk though I currently frequent and am on thier right now as typing this.
Vic , maybe you could share what company it is I keep on paltalk since I go to different rooms some pro-torah, and some just christian rooms I don't have a set room I "sit under".
On paltalk though I've spoken for christians keeping more of the torah than some give them credit for like the wieghtier matters of the law and them (to whom it applies) "walking more humbly before God" then some who proffess the keeping of torah but I've also spoken against the Rcc mormonism jws islam, and I've also spoken against some of the anomianism in the church also but have also contended strongly with antimissionaries about Jesus being the Messiah.
Quote:So---are your continual statements re the law, concerning Ephraim, the sheet vision not including animals and similar, suggesting you are not only advocating keeping the mosaic law--but you attempt to keep it? It not only looks like a duck, it sounds like one Greg. And if you attempt to keep it Greg, we've been through the verses regarding that--to not keep it all places you under the curse of the law
Attempt is true that I do and in some parts yes but not the totality of it.
Quote:Now if I am inaccurate in your advocating keeping the law, then all you need to do is state you take the Christian view of the NT, the New Covenant and Christ and doubt nothing in it, and do not advocate the Hebrew Roots view or Messianic view which presents itself as law bound--not all but many.
From what I know of british Israelism I will reject but I am not totally keyed up on the ins and out of that teaching, but the lost or scattered tribes I definatly see in scripture both old and new testaments (james 1 to whom he wrote his letter to).
I do reject anti-semtism openly knowing Christ came for all people Jew and Gentile , but I won't reject the law totally knowing Christ did advocate in keeping it at least in part, Paul also in places as you know speaking favourably of the law.
Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 7:12 Wherefore the law [is] holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good
Rom 7:13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
btw Vic what is the "Christian" view of the NT New Covenant and Christ you are reffering to, RCC or protestant, preterist or futurist, Trinitarian Oneness or Unitarian , Calvinist or Armenist, the church is and has replaced Israel or they are distinct one from another (acts 1 romans 11)
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - malawk - 01-08-2009 06:45 AM
Quote:Deu 30:1 And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call [them] to mind among all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath driven thee,
seems here your saying that verse 6 the circumsising of thier heart is the promise of the new covenant but then it jumps back in verses 7 8 and 9 to before Messiah and not that the blessings upon thier enemies and the keeping of the the commandments and the obeying of His voice is a "result" of the circumsising of thier heart in verse 6 if I am understanding you correctly.
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Rose of Shushan - 01-08-2009 10:21 AM
Quote:seems here your saying that verse 6 the circumsising of thier heart is the promise of the new covenant but then it jumps back in verses 7 8 and 9 to before Messiah and not that the blessings upon thier enemies and the keeping of the the commandments and the obeying of His voice is a "result" of the circumsising of thier heart in verse 6 if I am understanding you correctly.
Yes, you understood me correctly.
I think.LOL.As I'm not too sure I understood your last rather long sentence.
The circumcised heart is an allusion to the New Covenant.
The keeping of the commandments in this case refers to Moses' commandments,since thats why I replied originally with my explanation.Since you had highlighted in one of your posts where it said that they would observe Moses commandments that were given them that day.
Note however that this is in Deuteronomy,Moses was giving them an overall view of what would happen when the commandments were not kept and the curses of the Law would come upon them.
Moses had an unenviable task there.Impressing upon the people the blessings and curses of the covenant, giving hope but also stern warning.
So anyway all he gave was not set in stone(excuse the pun :bouncy.It was conditional the Sinai Covenant was conditional,it carried the ifs and that was what Moses was setting out with his words.
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Vic - 01-08-2009 06:51 PM
Quote:Malawk:... when you say "law of Moses" here I am guessing that you mean the law of Moses in its entirity in its full and as to if I keep it all entirely of course the question is no. Do I advocate the keeping of the law of Moses in its entirity (I believe this is what you mean) then the answer is no again. Partially yes on both of these though, one cannot help but advocate parts of the law of Moses since Jesus Himself quotes from it to all believers
Hi Greg, The problem with your saying you only keep part of the law and don't advocate keeping it all is that it violates the Scriptures regarding keeping the law. Just as I stated many in HR do. That is, they say they keep torah and meaning the Law of Moses--then they say they keep what they can, and eliminate a vast majority--which if they really were keeping the law--would apply. And as I already stated, without being Jewish, without living in Israel, without the Temple--no one can please God with their attempts.
By claiming to keep parts of the law you are in fact not only violating God's command concerning that in the OT, but also what the Apostles wrote after Christ died for our sins.
Deu 27:26 Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen.
Jas 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
Greg, there is no way to get around those verses concerning keeping the Mosaic law. None. Nada. No way.
Your statements suggest that you choose to pick and choose what laws you will apply to your life and you violate the very scriptures you say you try to keep. There is no Scripture to support you trying to keep bits and pieces of the Mosaic law.
Jesus quoted from the law, and showed new applications also--Before He died on the cross. Keeping the law of Moses was mandatory--with no excuses why they weren't applied and carried out, including the judgments, such as stoning adulterers, etc. To have not, would have exiled them from the covenants and promises. In transitioning to the New Covenant we see examples of Jesus not enforcing the Mosaic covenant but showing mercy or giving what was to be part of the New Covenant. After Jesus Christ died the New Covenant was in place.
You seem confused as to what that means.
Call the Mosaic law the old covenant or contract between God and Israel. Israel broke the covenant. Then God showed He could change the covenant because of their disobedience--and He broke it so that a better way would be known.
Zec 11:7 And I will feed the flock of slaughter, even you, O poor of the flock. And I took to me two staves; the one I called Beauty, and the other I called Bands; and I fed the flock. 8 Three shepherds also I cut off in one month; and my soul loathed them, and their soul also abhorred me. 9 Then said I, I will not feed you: that that dies, let it die; and that that is to be cut off, let it be cut off; and let the rest eat every one the flesh of another. 10 And I took my staff, even Beauty, and cut it asunder, that I might break my covenant which I had made with all the people. 11 And it was broken in that day: and so the poor of the flock that waited on me knew that it was the word of the LORD.
People in HR say God does not change and would not have changed the law. They ignore what the Scriptures say and that includes the OT which they take as God's truth, often renouncing the NT or saying it is just commentary or some of it's ok but the rest is corrupted by pagans etc etc.
God does not change--He is perfect, omniscient, holy, and so much more. But the Scriptures show there were many covenants and God--being the author of those covenants, can change or overwrite any of them. Especially when the other contracting party did not keep their part of it. That's the glory of His being God. Since Israel repeatedly showed they could not keep their end of it, He did what He has every right to do. He broke it from His side also so it became null ---like any contract where the parties break it.
Rom 4:14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:
In His love and mercy He provided a better way and promised a New Covenant--a new contract that was to be better than the old contract. Why? because mankind sins and could never keep the Old contract.
If you know anything about writing contracts --- many times concepts are carried forward from the old contract--which is why we see mention of things that reflect as being from the OT-- not just the Law of Moses. Things one finds in the OT but now, rendered part of the NT. As we see in Matthew 5, Jesus presented many "You have heard it said" and then provided new understanding and hence new commandments, with, "but I say unto you." We also see Him showing love, mercy and compassion instead of enforcing the judgements of the Mosaic law. ex: the woman taken in adultery; the woman with the issue of blood; touching dead bodies and so on.
Fast forward to Jesus dying on the cross, rising on the third day and sits at the Right hand of the Father--ever making intercession for those who believe. The priesthood changed, as did the covenant with Israel and all mankind.
Heb 7:18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. 19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. 20 And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest: ... 22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. ...24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. 25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
(14) How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? (15) And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
(16) For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. (17) For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. (18) Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
(19) For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, (20) Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
Heb 8:6-9 (6) But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. (7) For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. (8) For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: (9) Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
Heb 8:12-13 (12) For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. (13) In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
The New Testament encompasses that promised new covenant from God.
If on a journey, Greg, do you leave and then at the end of each day of travel, return to the point of starting? The law was good and just when it was in force, but trying to go back under it is to return to what God has said is fulfilled in Christ. He wants our focus to be on serving Jesus Christ. Galatians is filled with all the excuses people try to use to reject the New and return to the Old. It goes against what God said in the Old--but that doesn't matter to some. You can not straddle the fence with one foot in the old and one in the new. It doesn't work that way at all.
It's about Christ, Greg, following Him, not trying to keep under the schoolmaster that held no promise of eternal life.
Greg, you asked what is the "Christian" view of the NT etc. I have just given it to you as briefly as I can from my understanding of being a Christian over 35 years. I have no idea what others think in the list you gave. If you don't know what I mean by Christian, read the thread below http://www.seekgod.ca/forum/showthread.php?tid=50
Being a Christian not only includes that brief comment I made as the last post, but includes belief in: the virgin birth, the divinity of Christ, the finished work of the cross--by the way--do you believe in those Greg? the Scriptures as our standard and source of truth and so on.
Further, the lost tribes/ephraim doctrine is scriptural error and some would say heresy. There weren't just ten tribes and they weren't lost. If they were lost, James would not have written " to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad." Nor would we see the Jews from every nation in Acts 2. No one got lost unless it was spiritually, which was the case for many over the years.
But with Christ, no one need be lost...if they believe Him.
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - strefanash - 01-08-2009 11:21 PM
What is the problem here? if you (or I) are not perfect YOU DO NOT KEEP THE LAW. Not ANY of it. That is what James says, "he who breaks one breaks the lot", and Jesus summarized the Law by saying BE PERFECT.
BE perfect by all means, but if you are forced to admit that you are not, as scripture says none are, for "he who denies he has sin is a liar has not truth in him", you are logically required to cease compound your lawbreaking by commanding and attempting keeping of it (and so am I )
Therefore none of us can keep the law therefore none of us do.
As none of us keep the law our effort is waste. And neither wil grace aid teh effort. This is because our motive to strive in this manner is intrinsically wicked and the very motive to try to be good is itself poisoned by the fact that we are not good
But of course we in our sin natures refuse to accept this, and will twist the plain wording of scripture, or outright ignore it, to hold to our attempts to save ourselves. Believe me, sir, I have done this and wasted too many years in the effort.
being under the law has only one outcome. DEATH AND CONDEMNATION. That is what it is for.
What insisting that you can (or I) or must attempt to keep the law reverals is a radical and deep seated mustrust of the living God. And i am intimate with that one, be assured.
I have not followed this thread closely, so if I have misreperesent anyone i apologize, but my life as well as my very soul depends on this correct understanding of the Law. THis is no idle chatter or parlour game speculation on my part
It comes down to motive. If you "keep the law" even a part of it, out of duty, that very effort is sin. There seems to be confusion between what consistent effort to obey the law produces on one hand and what the law commands on the other.
If you advocate part of the Law as opposed to all of it, from motive of willpower duty then you are simply a watered down legalist.
If in liberty you love the Lord, well that is entirely different. But such people do not advocate life, they SHOW IT spontaneously by their daily living without force or strain
The difference is inner motive, and that difference is produced by repentance lead to by the gift of grace in personal one on one relationship with the Holy Spirit of the Risen Christ.
AS I do not show the life of the risen christ my advocating the Law of God (even though the Law commands, but can never prpoducew, this life) is worthless hypocrisy
RE: Did Peter's Vision of the Sheet Mean People & Food? - Vic - 01-10-2009 04:57 PM
Anders post and Rose's response have been moved and merged into the thread:
Research about the 'historical Jesus' and the origin of Christianity.
which was started by andersbranderud. Sorry for any inconvenience but it is all part of the same topic.