logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline doncarp14  
#1 Posted : Friday, November 1, 2019 10:59:01 AM(UTC)
doncarp14
Joined: 11/1/2019(UTC)
Posts: 8
United States

You state that paul is calling the law a curse by him saying we are under a curse; but isnt he in fact saying we are under a curse, not because the law IS a curse, but for breaking gods law (as deuterononmy 27 states, and because we are all sinners and have broken gods law)?
Also, you take paul to task for using nomos in place of Torah; in matthew 22 when Yahowsha says "...all the law (torah, i assume) and prohets hang on these.." the word used there is also nomos, not torah...
Offline InHisName  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, November 6, 2019 1:45:49 AM(UTC)
InHisName
Joined: 11/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 113

Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 59 time(s) in 36 post(s)
The “NT” text is unreliable. It is useless to debate what it means, because the text was never preserved. Per a study done by a Christian theologian there are more discrepancies in the text than there are words.

Your argument here is about the use of the Greek word nomos. Yahowsha didn’t speak Greek, so this is a translation of what He said, not what He actually said. If you don’t think He meant Torah, then what law was He speaking of? Could He mean that Yah’s words were dependent on Roman law? That was certainly the prevailing law of the land at that time. Or perhaps He was speaking of the law of the Pharisees and Jewish establishment. Neither of these are reasonable possibilities.

In context there is nothing but Torah that could have fit into that quote. But Torah is not law, it is teaching.
Sincerely, you need to put away the “NT” text, it is misleading and deadly. It will rob you of your soul, and your chance of LIFE in Yah’s family.
Offline doncarp14  
#3 Posted : Friday, November 8, 2019 7:21:38 AM(UTC)
doncarp14
Joined: 11/1/2019(UTC)
Posts: 8
United States

i am sure that he meant torah; that was the point. If he said torah it ended up in greek as "nomos"; the same thing with pauls writing---in other words greek translators may have thought nomos was acceptable word to convey torah as did paul.

the "NT" is the ony place we have Yahowsha's words; "putting it away" is certainly not an option for me, sorry it is for you.
I havent sen a response on my point about paul meaning the curse is from our breaking the law (as everyone has) and not the law itself..
Offline InHisName  
#4 Posted : Friday, November 8, 2019 1:00:50 PM(UTC)
InHisName
Joined: 11/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 113

Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 59 time(s) in 36 post(s)
i am sure that he meant torah; that was the point. If he said torah it ended up in greek as "nomos";
There is a huge difference between teaching and law. One provides a moral compass, the other a legal entanglement. Since you are obviously christian, I assume the real question behind the question is salvation. Your BELIEF in the false notions of christianity will not gain you the salvation you seek. Yahowah saves His children as part of the benefits of His Family oriented Covenant as outlined in the story of Abraham.

the same thing with pauls writing---in other words greek translators may have thought nomos was acceptable word to convey torah as did paul.
So the meaning of the NT text is based on what greek translators believed? Who were these greek translators? What did they believe? Where are the original texts so we can go back and check?

the "NT"
Yahowah has only one testament. It is the Towrah, supplemented and supported by the Prophets and Psalms. This is another mistranslation, the OT text says the Covenant will be REnewed… the only change is that the Torah will be written on our hearts, literally incorporated into our being. This happens at the end of the Tribulation

is the ony place we have Yahowsha's words;
Yahowsha had no original words, everything reliably attested to Him is a quote or restatement from the TPP. In every argument/question he answered to look at the Towrah. His last words are the first line of Psalm 22, the remainder of Psalm 22 is an accurate description of His sacrifice. Yahowsha WAS the Word. Not what the word would become, but what the word was at that time and at that time the Word was the Torah-Prophets-Psalms.
"putting it away" is certainly not an option for me, sorry it is for you.

You have nothing to lose by putting away the “NT”, but everything to gain. I understand all of this is difficult to listen to. This was not easy for me or most of us here to put away. Even Yada started to write Questioning Paul with the expectation of vindicating Paul.

BTW – it is not Yada or those of us on this forum that came up with this notion. Yah’s primary precept of the covenant is that all religion (indeed all of man’s hierarchical organizations) are errant and destructive and take us away from him. In Habbukuk He directly calls Paul the Plague of Death.
If you would like an overview of God's Way, I would suggest you read the [url=http://anintroductiontogod.com/An_Introduction_to_God-05.0-Mitswah-His_Terms.Torah]Mitswa chapter of An Introduction To God/url] (100 pages).This will create more questions than it answers, especially if you do not finish QP first.

I havent sen a response on my point about paul meaning the curse is from our breaking the law (as everyone has) and not the law itself..
I believe the gist of Paul was that the “law” was the problem because it is impossible for us to live a perfect life and therefore the “law” (Towrah) condemns us. Therefore we should put away the OT and follow Paul’s teaching of faith and grace (roman goddesses) and salvation through the sacrifice of “Jesus”. In other words Yahowah just didn’t think this through well enough and so had to come up with plan B (Jesus) and sent Paul to share the word.

I hope you can follow this through to the end, the reward is here. Open your eyes, ears and mind so you can understand and come to KNOW Yah.

Yada Yah
Allen

***If you would like to confront the author directly just click the email link on the QP homepage. He does not visit this forum.
thanks 1 user thanked InHisName for this useful post.
Disa on 11/22/2019(UTC)
Offline Stewart James  
#5 Posted : Friday, November 8, 2019 10:47:39 PM(UTC)
Stewart James
Joined: 7/4/2017(UTC)
Posts: 105
Man
Thailand
Location: Thailand

Thanks: 22 times
Was thanked: 5 time(s) in 5 post(s)
My answer to your question would be that Paul called the Torah "Law", so if you comprhend that Paul depicted the Torah as "Law" and the Law cannot save you, then in reality he is saying the Torah cannot save you!

Calling the law a curse, is then like calling the Torah/Towrah a curse, but then you just have to ask why Yah would provide His words and Torah/Towrah instructions to curse men? It makes no sense. A plain and simple Paulian lie!

If you want to do away with the law (Torah), then you might just as well do away with the "Bible" babble, since the "Bible" would not exist had it not been for the Torah!

The very foundtion of Yah's words are to be found in the Torah, the instructions of life, not law! So therefore if you do away with the Torah and bring in a corrupted Bible and Faith instead of knowing what Yah has to say through his own Torah/Towrah, then you have done away with Yah's words, thanks to Paul.

It's just Paul's trick to turn Torah/Towrah into "Law" thus the Law caannot save you, but faith alone in him and a false name instead of knowing the truth!

Truth is, Paul is a false teacher and a liar!
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken, or cease being honest!
Offline doncarp14  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, November 19, 2019 1:20:23 PM(UTC)
doncarp14
Joined: 11/1/2019(UTC)
Posts: 8
United States

Originally Posted by: InHisName Go to Quoted Post
i am sure that he meant torah; that was the point. If he said torah it ended up in greek as "nomos";
There is a huge difference between teaching and law. One provides a moral compass, the other a legal entanglement. Since you are obviously christian, I assume the real question behind the question is salvation. Your BELIEF in the false notions of christianity will not gain you the salvation you seek. Yahowah saves His children as part of the benefits of His Family oriented Covenant as outlined in the story of Abraham.

the same thing with pauls writing---in other words greek translators may have thought nomos was acceptable word to convey torah as did paul.
So the meaning of the NT text is based on what greek translators believed? Who were these greek translators? What did they believe? Where are the original texts so we can go back and check?

the "NT"
Yahowah has only one testament. It is the Towrah, supplemented and supported by the Prophets and Psalms. This is another mistranslation, the OT text says the Covenant will be REnewed… the only change is that the Torah will be written on our hearts, literally incorporated into our being. This happens at the end of the Tribulation

is the ony place we have Yahowsha's words;
Yahowsha had no original words, everything reliably attested to Him is a quote or restatement from the TPP. In every argument/question he answered to look at the Towrah. His last words are the first line of Psalm 22, the remainder of Psalm 22 is an accurate description of His sacrifice. Yahowsha WAS the Word. Not what the word would become, but what the word was at that time and at that time the Word was the Torah-Prophets-Psalms.
"putting it away" is certainly not an option for me, sorry it is for you.

You have nothing to lose by putting away the “NT”, but everything to gain. I understand all of this is difficult to listen to. This was not easy for me or most of us here to put away. Even Yada started to write Questioning Paul with the expectation of vindicating Paul.

BTW – it is not Yada or those of us on this forum that came up with this notion. Yah’s primary precept of the covenant is that all religion (indeed all of man’s hierarchical organizations) are errant and destructive and take us away from him. In Habbukuk He directly calls Paul the Plague of Death.
If you would like an overview of God's Way, I would suggest you read the [url=http://anintroductiontogod.com/An_Introduction_to_God-05.0-Mitswah-His_Terms.Torah]Mitswa chapter of An Introduction To God/url] (100 pages).This will create more questions than it answers, especially if you do not finish QP first.

I havent sen a response on my point about paul meaning the curse is from our breaking the law (as everyone has) and not the law itself..
I believe the gist of Paul was that the “law” was the problem because it is impossible for us to live a perfect life and therefore the “law” (Towrah) condemns us. Therefore we should put away the OT and follow Paul’s teaching of faith and grace (roman goddesses) and salvation through the sacrifice of “Jesus”. In other words Yahowah just didn’t think this through well enough and so had to come up with plan B (Jesus) and sent Paul to share the word.

I hope you can follow this through to the end, the reward is here. Open your eyes, ears and mind so you can understand and come to KNOW Yah.

Yada Yah
Allen

***If you would like to confront the author directly just click the email link on the QP homepage. He does not visit this forum.


So then, you accepot the "new testament" when Yahowsha is quoting OT passages and call those quotations "reliable"; and of course, anything else Yahowsha taught and explained are the "unreliable" quotations. How convenient for your point. However, the bigger picture is you are missing the forrest for the trees; you express belief in Yahowsha, and that he came as promised, but the only record we have of that happening in the first century AD is the unreliable, fraudulent new testament??!! So, you absolutely believe and trust in the NT as far as Yahowsha coming, and wherever he quotes scripture, but, everything else should be "put away". How do I even know/believe he came if I "put away" the NT?? How does not even knowing he came as promised possibly give me "everything to gain". Also, you badly misunderstand me, obviously I have questions/problems with Paul as well, or I wouldnt be at sites such as this. However, the arguments concerning Paul must make sense and be consistent. And questioning the epistles of paul is one thing (and no, not hard for my tender ears to hear), but even the author of this site supports the gospel records of john and matthew. "putting them away"???? as I said, you are left with no appearance of messiah coming as promised. You continue to conflate a support for the gospels and words of Yahowsha with me being an all or nothing Paul-believing cheap-grace advocate; that is not the case. You, however, have no case for even knowing Yahowsha without the "new testament", other than the promises of him in the old. Also, the book of Revelation is the final testimony and a companion book to Daniel and is simply the unsealing of the little book in Daniel. The visions of revelation correspond to the feasts of the OT and tghe prophecies have been unveiling before our eyes...
Offline matt  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, November 20, 2019 2:32:31 PM(UTC)
matt
Joined: 6/24/2014(UTC)
Posts: 22
United States

Thanks: 74 times
Was thanked: 7 time(s) in 5 post(s)

An unsolicited comment from some dude on the internet:

Over the years of tagging along on this adventure, it often seems that those who would like to tilt at the material usually haven't read it. I don't know if that is your case Don, but it is clear that you are not up to date on where the overall discussion is leading. Please listen in on the BTR show on Friday, and catch up on the more recent episodes on youtube. Doing so will show you exactly where the author of the Yada Yah material stands on a new testament, gospels, and paul, and more importantly what Yahowah has to say about those things.

Yahowah provides a lens through which His family can view and evaluate material, written, spoken, or otherwise, that is attributed or related to Him (and by extension any of His concerns or endeavors). Using Yahowah's own standard, we can look to the miscellany of what's called a gospel, and tear it apart, piercing its heart if you will. If there are aspects that pass Yahowah's test of credibility, then regard them as such. However, don't get religious when you are confronted with an obligation to abandon the parts that are rubbish (no matter how numerous they become).

As an aside, it seems to me at this point that perhaps the Yada Yah collection could benefit from a foreword, explaining that it is, and by virtue of its nature remains, a work in progress. It is a project that at its inception had direction, but a trajectory that could not be precisely known. The further we fly along this course, arcing away from erroneous ideas and concepts, the clearer the destination becomes. Each of the related volumes seem, at this point, a snapshot from different points along the arc. While that in no way invalidates the content, a new reader may be in need of some explanation.
Offline InHisName  
#8 Posted : Wednesday, November 20, 2019 8:58:40 PM(UTC)
InHisName
Joined: 11/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 113

Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 59 time(s) in 36 post(s)
So then, you accepot the "new testament" when Yahowsha is quoting OT passages and call those quotations "reliable"; I do not accept the NT! It is not reliable or trustworthy, it contains no prophecy to prove itself, at many points it contradicts the OT and itself. These are guidelines that Yah gave us to judge scripture and people. One failed prophecy or one contradiction of Yah’s teaching means that resource/person can’t be trusted.

and of course, anything else Yahowsha taught and explained are the "unreliable" quotations. How convenient for your point. Like any counterfeit, truth is interwoven with lies. How else would anyone believe it is real? A round pink $100 bill would not fool you for a minute.

However, the bigger picture is you are missing the forrest for the trees; you express belief in Yahowsha, and that he came as promised, but the only record we have of that happening in the first century AD is the unreliable, fraudulent new testament??!! I do not have belief of anything concerning Yahowah. I either know or I don’t know (this being the larger of the 2 possibilities). I know that Yah promised to provide the Passover Lamb and that He has or will provide as promised. I would not have said ‘has or will’ before your challenge, but you are correct, I cannot use the NT as supporting evidence if I also call it unreliable. So I hereby walk away from the whole thing. BigGrin

So, you absolutely believe and trust in the NT as far as Yahowsha coming, and wherever he quotes scripture, but, everything else should be "put away". How do I even know/believe he came if I "put away" the NT?? For me it doesn’t matter. My salvation is in the Towrah. Yah told me how to become a member of His Family and it is a done deal. I do not have to rely on the lies of Paul and the Romans. Yah promised me the same deal as Abraham, and I KNOW He will keep His word.

How does not even knowing he came as promised possibly give me "everything to gain". Salvation is Yah's gift to those who join his family. It is not available to anyone/everyone who decides to believe in the christ story. Yah's teaching to Abrahm was to walk away from Man ( the heirarchical institutions of men(religion, government, military, etc)) and walk towards Yahowah, learn, understand, trust who Yah is. Then choose to be adopted by Him making the decision that who He is and what He promises is what you want for eternity. Without your decision the Passover sacrifice offers nothing.

Also, you badly misunderstand me, obviously I have questions/problems with Paul as well, or I wouldnt be at sites such as this. However, the arguments concerning Paul must make sense and be consistent. And questioning the epistles of paul is one thing (and no, not hard for my tender ears to hear), but even the author of this site supports the gospel records of john and matthew. My understanding is that Yada’s support of these chapters has diminished since the writing of QP, and that it was always qualified. With a firm understanding of Yah’s OT teaching it is possible to pull out pearls of truth, but those same pearls and more are found more abundantly and consistently in the OT

"putting them away"???? as I said, you are left with no appearance of messiah coming as promised. You continue to conflate a support for the gospels and words of Yahowsha with me being an all or nothing Paul-believing cheap-grace advocate; that is not the case. Yahowah is my savior, my God, my Father. The Passover Lamb was/is but His tool.

You, however, have no case for even knowing Yahowsha without the "new testament", other than the promises of him in the old. I do not need to know Yahowsha. Those promises are more than words, they are prophecy coming from the only one who knows the future. I can think of no stronger case.

Also, the book of Revelation is the final testimony and a companion book to Daniel and is simply the unsealing of the little book in Daniel. The visions of revelation correspond to the feasts of the OT and tghe prophecies have been unveiling before our eyes... Before completing this response I would have been curious about your correlation to the feasts, but now I couldn’t care less. I know what the feasts are about and have no need to know about revelation. But with your questioning I have finally thrown out the baby (with the bath water) and am very happy about that. THANK YOU.

It may help you to understand us/me by realizing that we are also on a journey to find Yah’s Way. Yada + other’s translations and commentary have continually evolved. QP was rewritten several times. The 3000 pages of YY was rewritten seven times. Observations For Our Time is rewriting it all. But with each of these rewrites we have gotten closer to the bedrock. Much of what you find on this forum is old and out dated thinking. Even now, much of what you read in QP and YY and OFOT is becoming obsolete. We are only humans, but we are humans that enjoy being corrected when we are wrong, as I was in holding onto the pearls among the pigs in the NT. With your help, I now happily have both feet planted firmly in the OT.
Offline InHisName  
#9 Posted : Monday, November 25, 2019 11:38:09 AM(UTC)
InHisName
Joined: 11/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 113

Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 59 time(s) in 36 post(s)
A counterfeit must contain enough truth that it is believable. If I handed you a round pink $100 bill you wouldn't even consider that it was real. But a fake bill that looks and feels real takes more knowledge to discern its value. With the knowledge to discern true from false comes the ability to trust.

After nearly 2 decades of learning Yah's teaching and coming to understand who He is and what he wants, it is possible to recognize truth even when it is mixed with lies. So yes I have accepted Yahowsha as the Passover Lamb. And have been willing to accept NT testimony when it does not conflict with Towrah teaching.

However, your challenge did resonate. I do understand your point. I am willing to renounce all support of the NT and do so at this time. There is nothing I need in the NT.

Yah has provided everything needed to find Him and to become a member of His family. After that it is all on Him. I TRUST Him to complete His promises, I do not need to see them or even have knowledge that they are completed, I know that He will keep His word.

I appreciate your effort to search for His Way. All of us here are on that path. We will gladly help in any way we can. But there is little we can do other than point the way. Only Yah’s words will provide the knowledge you need to understand and then trust. The YY translations are the most accurate you will find and the process is laid bare for you to validate for yourself. But the first step, for Abraham, for us, for YOU is to walk away from Babylon, the hierarchical constructs of men (religion, government etc.). So shaking off religion with Questioning Paul is probably your best first step.


In His teaching Yah gave us tools to discern who and what to trust. One, Yah’s Word must contain unerring prophecy to be valid. Two, anything that contradicts Yah’s Word is false.

Paul's premise is that there were 2 covenants. One tied to Hagar, Mt Sinai in Arabia, slavery and is below Jerusalem. The other is tied to a freewoman who gave birth on the promise from Yah and is tied to Jerusalem which is the mother to us all (?). (Gal:4)

Yah only established one covenant. It was codified in Genesis with Abraham , Sarah and Isaac. Hagar and Ishmael were excluded, Mt Sinai wasn’t mentioned. Yah’s plan for us all is to release us from the bondage put on us by other men, He would not create a plan to put us into bondage. (This is why the onus is o us to come to understand Him BEFORE joining the family. What if you didn't like Him or the life He is offering, and got stuck in eternity with Him? That would seem like bondage.)

So this is a lie which sits at the heart of Paul’s Christianity. It discredits Yah's plan of salvation through grace and shows Paul to be untrustworthy. How can any of his text be trusted?

Allen

Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.