Gues I’ll give Swalch a break, and deal with this line of nonsense from you for him.
wrote:The stupid nonsense is your attitude and post. I don’t care how much you “translated”(no doubt twisted and perverted the words of the living God-Jer. 23)the Old testament writings, it is no guarantee you understand anything.
Let’s start with a point of agreement, yes, you can translate all of the Scriptures and still not understand it, this is evidenced by the idiocy of the translators/authors of the New living Translation. So just because Swalchy has translated the Renewed Covenant doesn’t mean all of his understandings are accurate. BUT, it does mean that he is more qualified than most to comment on the meaning of Greek words.
Second, if you are going to accuse him of twisting and perverting the words, you really should get some proof. Take the time to look at his translations, and then perhaps sight sources that show his translation is wrong. Just a suggestion, but coming in and telling someone who has spent the better part of 4 years studying and learning Greek that you know more about it than him is kind of stupid, unless you have spent an equivalent or greater time studying it.
wrote:Perhaps, had you consulted any Hebrew dictionary or Lexicon, you would find the consistent testimony that hadas in adjective form means NEW, something not existing before.
Now, I have been teaching myself Hebrew for the last about 8 months now. Now I am no expert, but what I do have is a nice set of tools which aid me, I’m currently translating Bare’shiyth and enjoying every minute of it. So I took the time to check every Lexicon and Dictionary I have. These include:
Dictionary of Biblical Languages: Hebrew,
Brown–Driver–Briggs Hebrew Lexicon,
A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament,
Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament,
NASB Dictionaries (I use this mostly for their transliterations, the definitions are simplistic ones.)
Exaustive Dictionary of Biblical Names Theological Word Book of the Old Testament
Not one of which identifies the primary meaning of Chodeshah as being new. And a study of the root of the word makes it VERY clear that its primary meaning is renewal. Every lexicon agrees. The only place where New is given any kind of prominence is in Strong’s, which was written to confirm the KJV.
wrote:I see you don’t want to go there, nor can you cite any reputable Hebrew authority for “renew”. That is your interpretation imposed on the word.
I just gave you several sources; you have yet to give one. I have studied the Hebrew word, its root word and it’s uses, and renew is the most appropriate translation of it. Any Hebrew scholar who isn’t locked into protecting the Religion of Christianity will tell you that.
wrote:You HAVE TO impose, for the simple statement as found in jeremiah upends your view. The Old will end and a New will come. Judaizers just can’t have that, as their heresy is refuted by one simple word in the Bible.
You’re honestly beginning to sound like a Muslim here with your circular reasoning. There is a famous saying, ‘You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.’ Thus far we have provided sources and evidence for the Hebrew word Chodeshah being renewed, you have provided nothing. Facts are facts, and the facts in this case are on our side.
Let me deal with this Judaizer word you like to keep throwing out. According to the dictionary a judaizer is one who adopts Jewish customs and beliefs. Since every “custom” or “belief” that we have enumerated here is based in Scripture, and not in the Jewish religion, we are not judaizers. Yahuweh said that his prescriptions where for all time. Yahuweh calls the Miqara HIS, it is the Passover of Yahuweh, not the Jewish Passover. Judaism is based upon the Talmud not the Torah, we believe in being Torah observant, and as Rob already pointed out to you, observe doesn’t mean mindless do, it means examine, scrutinize and understand.
wrote:Second, proof of your ignorance is further demonstrated by your question about how my testimony is different from people converting to Islam or some other religion surely exposes you as utterly oblivious to spiritual things, truths, or the power of God. My testimony is different from the others because the others all teach you can save yourself.
So the only difference in your testimony is the theology. It doesn’t change a damn thing, all you had was an emotional argument for why you believe what you believe, your life was changed because you became a Christian, good for you congratulations, everyone here could tell a similar emotional story of how our lives have been changed by coming to the understandings we have, and guess what we don’t think we can save ourselves either, so there your difference is gone. Now we are left with similar stories and we can all make our emotional appeals for our stories, and good for all of us, that doesn’t make you any more right than it makes me, the only thing that matters, is facts and truth. So I don’t really care about your personal testimony.
Yahuweh inspired David to write:
"Yahuweh’s Towrah is complete and entirely perfect, returning, restoring, and transforming the soul. Yahuweh’s testimony is trustworthy and reliable, making understanding and obtaining wisdom simple for the open-minded." (Psalm 19:7)
Notice also pleas that it is Yahuweh’s Torah, not the Jew’s Torah, therefore observing it is not Judaizing, it is Yahuwehizing.
wrote:My testimony, following what is clear in both testaments, is that I repented and trusted in Christ to save me, and HE DID.
Again the only difference is your theology. Still an emotional argument with no basis.
wrote:Your sectarian bias and pride seeks to reduce the transforming power of God in my life, and the blood of Christ, which washed me clean, to another religious conversion story. Typical judaizer.
OHHH Sectarian bias. You came to us and picked a fight, we didn’t come to you. The only thing I seek to reduce is the emotional high or religion that is blinding you from the truth. Typical Christina (See I can call names and dismiss your arguments with our reason too)
wrote:After I was saved, I read through the New Testament four times in one week.
Good for you, but you started at the wrong end of the book. How can you possibly expect to understand the last chapter of a book if you haven’t read the first 4/5ths of the book first?
The only way to understand the MessiYah is through the perspective of the Torah, Prophets and Writings, what He Himself referred to as Scripture. To base your understanding only on the end, and then include as Scripture the writings of Paul, a man who wrote to other men, where we only have one side of the conversation, a man who did not spend a significant amount of time with the Messiyah, didn’t witness his fulfillment of the Passover, Matsha, and Firstfruits, or to quote the book of Hebrews, a book who’s author is unknown, as Scripture and base your understanding of God on that, is just plain stupid.
Until you understand the Torah, Prophets, and Writings, and view Yahushua’s life from that perspective you will never understand what he said, or did.
wrote:I have read the Pentateuch numerous times. If you were a man led by the Spirit, you would not be making false accusations.
Good for you, reading and understanding are two different things.
wrote:You don’t even know the difference between the word new and renew in Hebrew, and seek to make them the same.
I know the difference, you don’t. I have cited sources, you have not.
wrote:The understanding problem is yours. The Word of God is become of none effect because of your traditions, which are the judaizer errors.
Yes I have an understanding problem, because I can’t for the life of me understand how you view what you have posted here as sane, rational, or evidenced. And no one can make the Word of God of no effect.
wrote:And then you reference the link I posted as if you read all three of those articles before you posted. I don’t believe you. Had you read them, you would not be posting more of your ignorant mythology. Those articles absolutely debunk what you claim. Period. All that is required is honesty.
You sight one article and that is supposed to debunk all the Hebrew scholars in the world. This reminds me of the 6000yr old Earth Christians who will sight one study they read about in some Christian magazine which showed that carbon dating is wrong, and dismiss the millions of studies which show that is accurate.
It must have been one hell of a conspiracy to go and make it look like no language until very recently had a J. How many ancient languages did they have to corrupt to do that, or was it just that Hebrew was the only language that had a J.
wrote:As far as Matthew 5:17-20, Christ surely was speaking of the Writings and prophcies of the Old Testament Scriptures.
Yahushua was speaking of the Prophets and other Writings, in other words Scripture.
wrote:Jots and tittles do not refer to rituals that need to be performed(!!!), but obviously are the smallest part OF WORDS, yes words found in the Scriptures that would be fulfilled.
Jots and tittles refer the smallest letters in the languages. He is saying that not the smallest part of His Word would be done away with until ALL had been fulfilled, that indeed Heaven and Earth would pass away before His Word.
"Truly (amein – this is reliable and trustworthy), I say (lego – affirm and convey meaning with these words) to you, till (hoes) heaven (ouranos) and the earth (ges) pass away (parerchomai) not (ou) one (heis) jot (iota – the smallest letter, or yodh in Hebrew) nor tittle (keraia – the top stroke or horn of Hebrew letters) shall be passed by (parerchomai – be ignored or disobeyed, be disregarded) from (apo) that which was established in the Torah/Law(nomos – prescriptions for living, statues, ordinances, and duties as written in Scripture) until the time and place (hoes) it all (pas) happens (ginomai – comes to exist and takes place, is manifest in public in the context of history)." (Mattityahu/Matthew 5:18)
Last I checked the heaven and earth were still here, so I guess that means His Word has not passed away. Last I checked all the prophecies hadn’t been fulfilled.
According to Yahushua, not the smallest part of Yahuweh’s Torah is to be parerchomai – be ignored or disobeyed, be disregarded, this is in total contrast with your idea that only the “moral law” is still in effect, according to Yahushua, all of the Torah is still in effect.
wrote:Christ fulfilled them all in relation to our salvation and a relationship to God for this age, and he will fulfill the rest when He returns in glory establishing His kingdom upon the earth.
With the exception of the word Christ, we agree completely here. But you have just disproved your own argument. You have just stated categorically that not all of the Torah has been fulfilled, which means that not one jot or tittle of the Torah is obsolete.
wrote:There is nothing in Matt 5:17-20 that teaches the endless observance of the law of Moses, or some of it, or whatever you think still applies.
First of all calling it the law of Mosses is like saying the Declaration of Independence of Timothy Matlack, Moshe was just the scribe writing down what Yahuweh told him to, the Torah is of Yahuweh, not Moshe.
So in your opinion saying that not one thing will change, does not mean that we should continue to observe, the way Yahushua himself did.
wrote:The old code said EYE FOR AND EYE, and Christ says DON’T DO IT. Forgive! What is going on? He contradicted the old code and was establishing a SUPERIOR ONE.
If Yahushua had violated or contradicted so much as the smallest prescript of the Torah, His sacrifice would have been moot, He would have died for His sins, and not ours. Yahushua kept the Torah perfectly, an example that we should strive for.
Do you not realize the logical fallacy of God changing his mind? A god that changes isn’t reliable. This is what I want you to do….now this is what I want you to do, ignore all that stuff I said before. Yahushua was Yahuweh, Yahushua did not change anything, and He lived a Torah observant life, and fulfilled the Torah. You can’t trust a capricious god that that changes His mind, that god is unreliable. God has one plane, it has been the same from the beginning until the end, and will not change EVER, he has told us that it will not change. He warned us of false prophets who would preach messages that were not from him, and contradicted him, and would lead us away from him.
wrote:Christ did not come to destroy the Scriptures or set what they said aside,
Then why do you insist on setting them aside and ignoring them?
wrote:but to fulfill them, and part of that fulfillment is bringing to an end the law of Moses,
The Mat. Verse we have just been discussing say the exact opposite, he said
"Do not (me) assume (nomizo – suppose or acknowledge, following as a custom or tradition) that (hoti) I have come (erchomai – have arrived and appeared)to weaken, dismantle, invalidate, or abolish (kataluso – loosen, tear down, or dissolve, put an end to, do away with, or annul) the Torah/Law (nomos – prescriptions for living, statutes, ordinances, and duties as written and established in Scripture) or the Prophets (prophetes – those who spoke for God).
Yahushua disagrees with you, he said he DID NOT come to end the Law. What part of DO NOT are you not getting here?
wrote: The "torah" predicted the end of the law of Moses, the end of the Old Covenant, and the promise of a NEW one NOT LIKE the Old one-Jer. 31:31-34.
No it didn’t, again Yahushua said I DID NOT COME TO END THE LAW.
wrote:I know you will attempt no exegesis of that passage, for you would have to twist it beyond repair, and it would be obvious you were doing that.
"Behold, the day is coming (bow' - will arrive and will happen, will be included in association with others, and will be pursued for the purpose of a harvest) declares Yahuweh that I will make(karat - cut) a Renewed (chadashah - repaired and restored) Covenant (beriyth - relationship, alliance based upon friendship, agreement between parties, marriage) with the household (bayith - home or family) of Yisra'el (from sarah, those who have power with, strive and persist with 'el, God) and with the family (bayith - household and home) of Yahuwdah (from yadah and Yah, those who belong to Yahuweh and confess His name)." (Jeremiah 31:31)
"God existing as man ('Yshayah'el - a name which means: God exists as man) through relationship('asher - by way of association) cuts (karat - makes by way of circumcision) a Covenant (beriyth - a relationship) with the family (bayith - household and home) of Yisra'el (meaning those who strive with God) in those days declares Yahuweh. I will put (nathan - give, set, commit, entrust, deliver, assign, and bestow in a healthy and enduring fashion) My instructions (torah - directions and prescriptions) inside them(qereb - in their midst and inner parts so they can approach, come near and draw close), engraving them (kathab - in writing, inscribing, and describing by recording them) in their hearts. I will exist as (hayah) their God and they shall exist as (hayah) My family." (Jeremiah 31:33)
Here is not only saying RENEWED, not New, he uses Torah, saying that he will write the Torah in our HEARTS. If you hate the Torah, my guess is it isn’t written on your heart. One verse after saying that he will Renew His covenant, he links it to His Torah, meaning the Torah was not done away with because of a Renewal of the covenant.
Most everyone here has taken the time to look at closely examine and study the Words that Yahuweh choose, you are the one clinging to English translations, and not doing any kind of study on what was written.
wrote:And the Passover was a celebration of a past historical event—the deliverance from Egypt.
That is really only part of the story, the Passover was much much more important as a prophecy of what was to come, the Exodus was only a type and shadow of the Passover sacrifice of Yahushua. We celebrate Passover now in remembrance and as a celebration of Yahushua’s sacrifice, thought the Exodus story makes a great basis for understanding what Yahushua was doing for us, leading us out of the crucible, the oppressive religions of man, and into family and relationship with Him.
wrote:It also points typically to THE REAL THING—THE BLOOD OF CHRIST DELIVERING US FROM THE WRATH OF GOD.
Yahushu’s sacrifice has nothing to do with saving us from the wrath of God, His Passover sacrifice was all about saving us from the consequence of sin, death, a natural consequence which is not a punishment from god, it has nothing to with God being wrathful.
God doesn’t punish any of us, those who reject him will die separated from him and that will be the end. Those who know him and trust him, will live eternally with him. Those who attack him, and lead others away from him, will spend eternity separated from him, because that was their choice.
wrote:To celebrate the Passover, AS IF it has not happened, as if that somehow keeps you safe with God, when Christ has come,
No one here keeps Passover as though it hadn’t been fulfilled, we keep Passover as a commemoration and celebration of Yahushua’s fulfillment.
wrote: to not instead move forward and celebrate the Lord’s Supper, the real Passover meal, is like a a grown man refusing to get out of diapers.
Funny you think if Yahushua had wanted us to keep Ba’al Supper he would have told us to. Yahushua kept Passover, the “Last supper” was a Passover meal. The LORDS SUPPER was instituted by Catholicism, when Constantine, a man after your own heart (he he hated the judaizers too), forbad the celebration of Passover or anything else related to the Jews, and instead instituted all of the pagan festivals you keep today, even making a proclamation that all things that were to be done on the Sabbath, he here by moved to the LORDS DAY, SUNDAY, because his Lord was the Sun God Mithras.
wrote:Paul called the law a tutor to bring us to Christ.
Well that’s good for Paul, he got this one right. The torah does point to MessiYah.
wrote:Now we are to be sons, not little boys needing Moses.
Again, Moshe was only the scribe, Yahuweh was the author of the Torah, and you know what, I’m perfectly fine with being dependant and reliant on Yahuweh.
wrote:We have Christ and the promised Holy Spirit. The new Covenant is here, the Old is gone, and God had the Romans come and destroy the Temple to make this point clear.
Why don’t you take it one step further and go along with Marcion all the way, it’s a new god too.
wrote:I see you still use the word law and torah in a way that is careless, confusing and misleading.
Confusing and misleading, funny that’s the same thing Peter said about your boy Paul’s writings, and given you as an example I think I have to agree with ole’ Shimown.
Law, as we have already pointed out, is a horrible translation of Torah, prescriptions for living is a much more explanatory translation.
wrote:Of course real Christians “keep the law”. The question is WHAT LAW?
Yupp your right on here. They keep the law, the law of the church, of Constantine, of their pastor, everything but the law of Yahuweh, they have no use for that.
wrote:When you use the word Torah, usually, we have found it meant keeping parts of the Mosaic covenant. It depends which Judaizer group we have spoken with. If you mean we are violating Mosaic laws and ceremonies that you think we ought to keep, you are surely wrong. JUST HOW MUCH OF MOSES DO WE HAVE TO FOLLOW? HOW MUCH “TORAH”? You don’t say, and you won’t say. All Judaizer groups can’t agree on God’s Name, Christ’s Name, nor can they agree how much Moses we need to be “Torah-observant”. You people are not only totally confused individually, but in disarray corporately.
AGAIN, it’s not Moses Law, its Yahuweh’s. Moses was a scribe he had practically no input on what was being written.
And it’s not about KEEPING the Torah, it’s about Observing the Torah, studying and understanding Yahuweh’s primary communication with Man. Keeping it as in performing and following it, is greatly beneficial, it helps us. Yahuweh knows what is good for us, and told us. Not a single person is save by following the Torah to the T. No one in history has been saved because they followed Passover exactly as the Torah prescribed, but everyone who has been saved has Trusted and Relied upon Yahuweh to fulfill Passover. And Trust and Reliance requires Knowledge and Understanding, which requires Study, Examination, and Scrutinizing Yahuweh’s Word/Torah. Are we seeing a pattern here?
As for God’s name, there is a possibility that we have the pronunciation slightly off, but at least we try to use the name he asked us to call Him by, and don’t replace it with the moniker of the Adversary, LORD. Calling Yahuweh Lord would be like going up to Roosevelt during WW2 and calling him der fuhrer.
What we do know about his name is it is Yod Hay Waw Hay. I’m not going to get into to how we know about our pronunciations here, there are plenty of other posts on the forum that explain that.
wrote:And I see you like to cherry-pick New testament authors where you can suit your purposes.
Well, I for one don’t see most of the Renewed Covenant writings as Scripture, and am very leery of trusting them, after studying the history of how they got passed to us, let’s just say I’m very leery of the fidelity of the manuscripts we have. Also much of the RC is letters that people wrote, where we only have one side of the conversation, I’m not willing to base anything solely on that. I think some of the authors have great insights; I’m particularly interested in reading what the people that spent 3 years following Yahushua and learning directly from Him, or His Brother who knew Him his whole life. Paul is a whole different story, and I’m not getting into it in this thread.
wrote:You reference the Apostle John who said sin was the transgression of the law. But you don’t say WHAT LAW, nor do you prove what he meant.
Swalch mention John for that, and I think that John was right, but I don’t need John for that. The definition of Sin is a violation of the standard, missing the mark. You ask what law, Yahuweh’s law, Yahuweh’s standard, Yahuweh’s mark. Sin is falling short of Yahuweh’s standard, His TORAH.
wrote:He was speaking of the MORAL LAW, living holy, not sinning,
First of all he never talks of MORAL LAW, he only talks of Torah. Second, you just made a completely illogical circular argument, “Sin is a transgression of the Law, and the Law is the Moral law, which is sinning” You just defined sinning as sinning. You cannot use a word to define itself.
And what is living Holy, the word for Holy is Qodesh, which means Set Apart. How do you live “Holy” how do you live a set apart life, you observe Yahuweh’s Torah. Neither Yahuweh nor Yahushua EVER talked of a law other than Torah, there is no MORAL LAW in Scripture, it is a Christian myth.
wrote:which is explained by him to WALK IN LOVE TOWARDS OTHERS. That is fulfilling “the law”. Nothing in 1John ever mentions following Mosaic rituals and ceremonies.
I don’t need john to tell me, Yahuweh defined it himself.
wrote:Its all about inward and outward holiness and love for God. It is about walking in the Light, being cleansed by Christ’s blood, loving the brothers, loving God, believing on the Name of Jesus Christ, avoiding heretics, etc.
Believing in the name of jebus is useless. I love how you capitalize Name to stress the importance, and then give the wrong name.
It’s all about KNOWING and TRUSTING Yahuweh. Your faith and beliefs are irrelevant. Your love is useless if it isn’t directed at the only real God, Yahuweh. Loving a god of man’s creation is useless, the only real God is Yahuweh, the God of the Torah, Prophets and Psalms, the God of ‘Abraham, Yit’shaq, and Ya’cob, the God of the Exodus, the God who sacrificed Himself on the Upright Pole, for us. Jebus is not the real God, the LORD is not the real God, and the Christian god is not the real God, so loving them is useless.
wrote:Christ said the “law” was FULFILLED in the two great commandments—TO LOVE GOD and love your neighbor.
Way to distort Yahushua’s words, I’m sure he appreciates it. He was asked what is the GREATEST of the commandments, and he responded with that.
wrote:Those who do that are superior to the hypocrites who observe dead rituals but do not have love for God and neighbor in their hearts.
I can’t even think of a response to this nonsense. Everything I have written before negates this.
wrote:You deny Christ Jesus is your Saviour,
Yes I deny the horned one as my Savior. I think I will trust and rely on Yahushua, the MessiYah or Yahuweh. You can keep you jebus or gesus.
wrote:just like a Judaizer heretic would.
You just love being able to slap that label on us, that way you don’t have to deal with any of the facts, or arguments we bring up, we’re just a bunch of silly judaizers. You know I could do the same thing, I could just sit here and say, “Oh what a Christian thing to say’, but no I address your points, and provide facts and evidence.
wrote:Well did Paul warn of the nonsense your kind teaches, as found in the book of Galatians.
If Galatians was written by Paul then Paul was a false prophet and is going to spend his eternity in the abyss.
wrote:And for your information, Yahweh is not God’s name. The three articles I linked to PROVE THAT, His Name is Jehovah. Christ’s name, as uttered by Christ Himself to John the Apostle is “Ego Iesous”—I Jesus-Rev 22:16.
Oh yeah your little articles that disprove all of the scholars throughout history show that his name is Jehova. Again I’m not a big conspiracy theory fan, I don’t buy into crack pot theories, I think Muslims did 9/11, Oswald shot Kennedy, and there are no aliens at area 51.
As for your Iesous proving his name is jesus, first the obvious, Iesous isn’t Jesus, it’s Iesous. Second John did not write Iesous, he did the same thing that every other author did, and used a placeholder for his name, and third, Yahushua never spoke Greek, he spoke Aramaic and Hebrew, so everything we have in Greek is already a translation.
wrote:He did not bother with His Hebrew Name, forever proving that your insistence of calling Him by the Hebrew name is utter nonsense.
See above.
I suggest you take the time and study the history of the RC manuscripts, study the history of the translations, your beloved KJV is nothing more than a revision 5 times over of the Latin Vulgate, which is a compilation of the various old Latin manuscripts, which were translations of the Greek translations of the Aramaic and Hebrew conversations.
I would also suggest you take the time to learn a little Hebrew and Greek, and engage in word study to see what was actually written.
So you know, unless you make an actual reasoned and logical argument in which you present evidence, this will be the last response I will post, I have far too much to work on to keep writing lengthy responses to stupid challenges by someone who has no interest in Truth.
