COL 2:16 And The Sabbath - Are You Being Told The Truth?

[coconut theology]

Well, you've managed to throw out ... Maccabees ...

Let's consider 'some' of the incongruities within Maccabees, just in regards Antiochus IV Epiphanes:

Just looking at the discrepancies of Maccabees, the apocryphal [non-Scriptural KJB] materials in regards Antiochus IV Epiphanes:

"... The Three Deaths of Antiochus Epiphanes in three locations in as many ways:

1) First death - Antiochus’ first death is found in 1 Maccabees 6:1-16. According to this report he is in Persia and dies while in his own bed due to grief over military losses.

a) Location: Persia - 6:5
b) Place: in bed - 6:8
c) Cause: dies from a broken spirit due to military
reversals - 6:8, 9
d) People involved: friends - 6:10, Philip - 6:14
e) Dies: 6:16
f) Text: 1 Mac. 6:14 - 16

14 Then called he for Philip, one of his friends, whom he made ruler over his realm.

15 And gave him the crown, and his robe, and his signet, to the end he should bring up his son Antiochus, and nourish him up for the kingdom.

16 So king Antiochus died there in the hundred forty and ninth year.​

2) His second death - The “second” death of Antiochus is found in 2 Maccabees 1:14-17. In this passage he is also in Persia, but is in the temple of a false goddess Nanea during his wedding ceremony. He is supposedly assassinated by the priests of the goddess who drop huge stones down on him from above and then cut his body in pieces.

a) Location: Persia - 1:13
b) Place: the temple of the goddess Nanea during his
wedding - 1:13 - 15
c) Cause: crushed to death by stones hurled down from
the ceiling and then dismembered - 1:16
d) People involved: Antiochus' attendants & the priests
of Nanea who kill him - 1:15
e) Dies: 1:16
f) Text: 2 Mac. 1:14 - 16

14 For Antiochus, as though he would marry her, came into the place, and his friends that were with him, to receive money in the name of a dowery.

15 Which when the priests of Nanea had set forth, and he was entered with a small company into the compass of the temple, they shut the temple as soon as Antiochus was come in:

16 and opening a privy door of the roof, they threw stones like thunderbolts, and struck down the captain, hewed them in pieces, smote off their heads, and cast them to those that were without.​

3) His third death - The amazingly durable Antiochus dies his third and final time in 2 Maccabees 9:1-29. This time he is on his way to Jerusalem to wage war on the Jews. According to the text, God curses him and he is eaten by worms. Before he dies he repents of his evil intentions and writes a letter of peace to the Jews.

a) Location: the road to Jerusalem - 9:3 - 7
b) Place: on a mountain road - 9:8, 28
c) Cause:

1. God's curse on him - 9:5
2. He falls from his chariot - 9:7
3. worms eat him & his skin rots off - 9:9, 10
d) People involved: his chariot driver, his army - 9:4, 9
e) Dies: 9:28
f) In this account he repents and becomes a Jew and
then writes a letter of peace to the Jews.
g) Text: 2 Mac. 9:28
28 Thus the murderer and blasphemer having suffered most grievously, as he entreated other men, so died in a miserable death in a strange country in the mountains. ..." - Sam Gipp's 24 Hour Seminar Notes, pages 78-80, reformatted.​

We haven't even gotten to 3 and 4 Maccabees yet ...

 

[coconut theology]

...BTW, I disregard the validity of the views of the linked web site. ....

Of course you do, since you think the entire "church" is 'you'.

 

[coconut theology]

Moses is very likely a literary device since there is no evidence for the Exodus. ...

"Ignorance." Not something to boast about.

As for science, archaeology, and history, here is the material to consider:

 

[metis]

That last example is 'apples to oranges' fallacy. The two things are not the same. The first (Hebrews, Israelites and Jews) deals with nationality, genealogy, not a 'name change' (as Abram to Abraham).

Each (Hebrews, Israelites and Jews) are differing terms.

Hebrew means those who are of the lineage of Eber. An Eber-ew, such as Abram, Joseph and Moses were. Hebrew is an over arching term going back to all those descended of Eber.

Israelite means those who are of the lineage of Jacob (renamed, "Israel"), such as Joseph, Moses, etc. It is only an overarching term to those directly related to Jacob/Israel, and would not include those such as of Edom (Esau, etc), whereas 'Hebrew' would apply to such.

Jew means (primarily, though there is some leeway in after years, stemming from the Kingdom of 'Judah') those of the lineage of Judah, but later also included those of the remaining southern tribes (not Northern, who were Samaritans, Assyrians, etc, John 4:9), such as Judah, Benjamin (Esther 2:5; or like Paul of the NT, Acts 22:3, also calling himself an Hebrew of the Hebrews; Philippians 3:5 and Jesus was also of Judah (Revelation 5:5), and would be therefore the "king of the Jews" (Matthew 27:11; the southern Remnant, Kingdom of Judah where Jerusalem was.) and Levi, and any individual members of the northern tribes who still existed. Likewise this term would not be applied to those of Edom (Esau), whereas 'Hebrew' would be.

Abram was not a "Jew". Abram was not an "Israelite".

Moses was an Hebrew, an Israelite, but would not have been classed as "Jew" then, since he was of the tribe of Levi, and would therefore be Levite. It might later have been retroactively applied, but that has little to do with what we are speaking about in regards the Ten Commandments being only given to "Jews". It is nonsense to say that the Ten Commandments were only given to the "Jews". It is scripturally inaccurate, historically inaccurate and genealogically inaccurate. As stated, Moses' wife, Zipporah wasn't a 'Jew' and neither Israelite. The mixed multitude were Egyptians, Ethiopians, maybe some Arabians, etc.

Here:
In the Hebrew Bible the term Israelites is used interchangeably with the term Twelve Tribes of Israel. Although related, the terms Hebrews, Israelites, and Jews are not interchangeable in all instances. "Israelites" (Yisraelim) refers to the people that the Hebrew Bible describes specifically as the direct descendants of any of the sons of the patriarch Jacob (later called Israel), and his descendants as a people are also collectively called "Israel", including converts to their faith in worship of the god of Israel, Yahweh. "Hebrews" (ʿIvrim), on the contrary, is used to denote the Israelites' immediate forebears who dwelt in the land of Canaan, the Israelites themselves, and the Israelites' ancient and modern descendants (including Jews and Samaritans). "Jews" (Yehudim) is used to denote the descendants of the Israelites who coalesced when the Tribe of Judah absorbed the remnants of various other Israelite tribes...

Finally, in Judaism, the term "Israelite" is, broadly speaking, used to refer to a lay member of the Jewish ethnoreligious group, as opposed to the priestly orders of Kohanim and Levites. In texts of Jewish law such as the Mishnah and Gemara, the term יהודי (Yehudi), meaning Jew, is rarely used, and instead the ethnonym ישראלי (Yisraeli), or Israelite, is widely used to refer to Jews. Samaritans are not and never call themselves "Jews" יהודים (Yehudim), but commonly refer to themselves and to Jews collectively as Israelites, and they describe themselves as Israelite Samaritans.-- Israelites - Wikipedia

 

[3rdAngel]

sojourner said: ↑ ...BTW, I disregard the validity of the views of the linked web site. ....

Of course you do, since you think the entire "church" is 'you'.

You may have some trouble getting @sojourner to agree with you. He is a member of the Clergy that also practices Shamanism (occult). My experience is that he is not here for an open and honest discussion. He believes that the teachings and traditions of men that break the commandments of God that JESUS warns us about in MATTHEW 15:2-9 supersedes the Word of God.

 

[3rdAngel]

Here:
In the Hebrew Bible the term Israelites is used interchangeably with the term Twelve Tribes of Israel. Although related, the terms Hebrews, Israelites, and Jews are not interchangeable in all instances. "Israelites" (Yisraelim) refers to the people that the Hebrew Bible describes specifically as the direct descendants of any of the sons of the patriarch Jacob (later called Israel), and his descendants as a people are also collectively called "Israel", including converts to their faith in worship of the god of Israel, Yahweh. "Hebrews" (ʿIvrim), on the contrary, is used to denote the Israelites' immediate forebears who dwelt in the land of Canaan, the Israelites themselves, and the Israelites' ancient and modern descendants (including Jews and Samaritans). "Jews" (Yehudim) is used to denote the descendants of the Israelites who coalesced when the Tribe of Judah absorbed the remnants of various other Israelite tribes...

Finally, in Judaism, the term "Israelite" is, broadly speaking, used to refer to a lay member of the Jewish ethnoreligious group, as opposed to the priestly orders of Kohanim and Levites. In texts of Jewish law such as the Mishnah and Gemara, the term יהודי (Yehudi), meaning Jew, is rarely used, and instead the ethnonym ישראלי (Yisraeli), or Israelite, is widely used to refer to Jews. Samaritans are not and never call themselves "Jews" יהודים (Yehudim), but commonly refer to themselves and to Jews collectively as Israelites, and they describe themselves as Israelite Samaritans.-- Israelites - Wikipedia

How has what you have posted here different to what you are quoting from?

 

[metis]

If you read Mathew 19:17 in the New Testament ( which I believe applis to Christians ) you will see that Jesus lists several ( MORE THAN TWO ) commandments such as do not kill and do not steal so it would seem that these apply to Christians. Or should we throw out the book of Matthew and just pick those books we agree with?

If you are not going to believe in Jesus and his rather clearly stated Two Commandments, why should I expect you to pay attention to me? Again, those teachings beyond the Two are applications and/or explanations of those Two.

You cannot believe in Jesus if you don't actually believe in what he rather clearly had stated in the Sermon On the Mount, which is also repeated throughout the Gospel. It's the "love one another as I have loved you"-message that you just can't seem to wrap your head around.

 

[3rdAngel]

If you are not going to believe in Jesus and his rather clearly stated Two Commandments, why should I expect you to pay attention to me? Again, those teachings beyond the Two are applications and/or explanations of those Two.

You cannot believe in Jesus if you don't actually believe in what he rather clearly had stated in the Sermon On the Mount, which is also repeated throughout the Gospel. It's the "love one another as I have loved you"-message that you just can't seem to wrap your head around.

You do know that JESUS says "ON THESE TWO COMMANDMENTS (love to God and man) HANG ALL THE LAW and the prophets right? *MATTHEW 22:40. Love is the power through faith in God's Word that leads us to follow it and is why JESUS says elsewhere "If you LOVE me keep my commandments *JOHN 14:15; This is the new covenant promise of a NEW HEART *JEREMIAH 31:31-34; HEBREWS 8:10-12 and what it means to be born again *JOHN 3:3-7. Whosoever is born again does not pratice sin (breaking God's Commandments) *1 JOHN 3:6. This includes God's 4th commandment which is one of God's 10 commandments *EXODUS 20:8-11. This is also why Paul says ...

ROMANS 13:8-10 [8], Owe no man any thing, BUT TO LOVE ONE ANOTHER: FOR HE THAT LOVES ANOTHER HAS FULFILLED THE LAW. [9], FOR THIS, YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, YOU SHALL NOT KILL, YOU SHALL NOT STEAL, YOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS, YOU SHALL NOT COVET; AND IF THERE BE ANY OTHER COMMANDMENT, IT IS BRIEFLY COMPREHENDED IN THIS SAYING, NAMELY, YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF. [10], Love works no ill to his neighbor: therefore LOVE IS THE FULFILLING OF THE LAW.

You cannot separate LOVE from LAW as Love is expressed through obedience to God's LAW. This is God's new covenant promise of a new heart to love *HEBREWS 8:10-12

Sin which is defined in the scriptures are disobedience or breaking any one of God's 10 commandments *JAMES 2:10-11; 1 JOHN 3:4; ROMANS 3:20; ROMANS 7:7 is the difference between the children of God and the children of the devil *1 JOHN 3:6-10; 1 JOHN 2:3-4; REVELATION 12:17; REVELATION 14:12; REVELATION 22:14

There is not one scripture in all of God's Word that says God's 4th commandment has now been abolished and we are now commanded to keep Sunday as a Holy day. This is a teaching and tradition of men that has lead many to break the commandments of God that JESUS warns us about as do the books of Daniel and Revelation. God's people are in every church. He is calling those who have ears to hear to come out of these false teachings and to worship God in Spirit and in truth, back to the pure Word of God *JOHN 10:16; JOHN 4:23-24; REVELATION 17:3-6; REVELATION 18:1-5

Hope this is helpful

 

[sojourner]

Continuing:

For instance (shown from the KJB and DR; Douay Rheims Online, 'DR' from here on), there was already the "church in the wilderness", which was with Moses, children of Israel:

Act. 7:38 KJB This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

Act. 7:38 DR This is he that was in the church in the wilderness, with the angel who spoke to him on mount Sina, and with our fathers; who received the words of life to give unto us.​

Additionally, Paul wrote that the "oracles of God" were committed unto the Jews, and Peter also mentions this:

Rom. 3:1 KJB What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

Rom. 3:2 KJB Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Rom. 3:1 DR What advantage then hath the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision?

Rom. 3:2 DR Much every way. First indeed, because the words of God were committed to them.

Heb. 5:12 KJB For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

Heb. 5:12 DR For whereas for the time you ought to be masters, you have need to be taught again what are the first elements of the words of God: and you are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

1 Pet. 4:11 KJB If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

1 Pet. 4:11 DR If any man speak, let him speak, as the words of God. If any man minister, let him do it, as of the power, which God administereth: that in all things God may be honoured through Jesus Christ: to whom is glory and empire for ever and ever. Amen.​

Now the DR here (1 Pet. 4:11), inserting a comma changes the meaning, from the text itself as from saying (KJB) that when men speak they are to speak what the scriptures say, and the Jesuit (DR) makes it to mean that whatever a man speaks, that is "the words of God", thus eliminating the foundation from the text itself, to men (in what they say).

The entire OT texts were already 'canon' in the days of Jesus, none of which included any of the apocrypha (aka 'catholic deuterocanon'). Jesus Himself identified the texts:

Luk. 24:44 KJB And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Luk. 24:45 KJB Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

Luk. 24:44 DR And he said to them: These are the words which I spoke to you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Luk. 24:45 DR Then he opened their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures.​

Jesus identified the beginning and the ending of the OT among the children of Israel:

Mat. 23:35 KJB That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Mat. 23:35 DR That upon you may come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just, even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar.

Luk. 11:50 KJB That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;

Luk. 11:50 DR That the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation,

Luk. 11:51 KJB From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.

Luk. 11:51 DR From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, who was slain between the altar and the temple: Yea I say to you, It shall be required of this generation.​

This is an important statement by Jesus since, it gives two 'book ends' on the prophets, "Abel" unto "Zacharias", which was the "A" to "Z" of the OT, since according to the children of Israel's reckoning, Chronicles was the last bookof the Tanakh (OT) [Torah (Gen. to Deut.), Prophets (Jos. to Mal.), Writings (Psa. to 2 Chron.)]:

2 Chron. 24:20 KJB And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, which stood above the people, and said unto them, Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the LORD, that ye cannot prosper? because ye have forsaken the LORD, he hath also forsaken you.

2 Chron. 24:20 DR The spirit of God then came upon Zacharias the son of Joiada the priest, and he stood in the sight of the people, and said to them: Thus saith the Lord God: Why transgress you the commandment of the Lord which will not be for your good, and have forsaken the Lord, to make him forsake you?

2 Chron. 24:21 KJB And they conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king in the court of the house of the LORD.

2 Chron. 24:21 DR And they gathered themselves together against him, and stoned him at the king's commandment in the court of the house of the Lord.

2 Chron. 24:22 KJB Thus Joash the king remembered not the kindness which Jehoiada his father had done to him, but slew his son. And when he died, he said, The LORD look upon it, and require it.

2 Chron. 24:22 DR And king Joas did not remember the kindness that Joiada his father had done to him, but killed his son. And when he died, he said: The Lord see, and require it.​

I would recommend a helpful webpage with further detail - How Many Books Are In The Old Testament?

Peter also already knew (well before AD 90, sometime circa AD 65-68, since the epistles mention Peter's nearing death (2 Pet. 1:14) what the 'scriptures' were in regards to Paul's epistles (14 letters, Romans to Hebrews; ie, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews):

2 Pet. 3:16 KJB As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

2 Pet. 3:16 DR As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.​

The Holy Scriptures are inspired of God, and are therefore, not 'catholic', but rather is God's word, the "word of God" (Jhn. 10:35):

2 Tim. 3:15 KJB And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2 Tim. 3:15 DR And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation, by the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2 Tim. 3:16 KJB All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Tim. 3:16 DR All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice,

2 Tim. 3:17 KJB That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

2 Tim. 3:17 DR That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

2 Pet. 1:21 KJB For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

2 Pet. 1:21 DR For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.​

The "scriptures" were already well known in Jesus' day in regards the OT, as per:

Dan. 10:21; Mat. 21:42. 22:29, 26:54,56; Mar. 12:10,24, 14:49, 15:28; Luk. 4:21, 24:27,32,45; Jhn. 2:22, 5:39, 7:38,42, 10:35, 13:18, 17:12, 19:24,28,36,37, 20:9; Act. 1:16, 8:32,35, 17:2,11, 18:24,28; Rom. 1:2, 4:3, 9:17, 10:11, 11:2, 15:4, 16:26; 1 Cor. 15:3,4; Gal. 3:8,22, 4:30; 1 Tim. 5:18; 2 Tim. 3:15,16; Jam. 2:8,23, 4:5; 1 Pet. 2:6; 2 Pet. 1:20, 3:16 ​

In fact, how could Jesus say to the Jews, "Search the scriptures" that prophesied of Christ Jesus, if the Jews had no idea what "the scriptures" were, to search, and every man had their own idea as to what constituted them?

Jhn. 5:39 KJB Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Jhn. 5:39 DR Search the scriptures, for you think in them to have life everlasting; and the same are they that give testimony of me.​

In fact, none of the apocrypha ('catholic deuterocanon'), are cited by any of the Apostles in the NT as fulfilling prophecy (some might attempt to point to Jud. citing so-called 'Enoch' (pseudopigrahpon), but that is another matter, and it doesn't either, as both are referring to Gen. and Deut.).

The angel Gabriel, in the days of Daniel was able to explain to Daniel, the prophecies given him from the very texts which existed before 'Daniel' was written (basically Gen. to Jer. (maybe some Eze.) and others hadn't yet been written by then, such as Ezr., Neh., Est., etc. and some of the 'minor prophets'):

Dan. 10:21 KJB But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.

Dan. 10:21 DR But I will tell thee what is set down in the scripture of truth: and none is my helper in all these things, but Michael your prince.​

As for the 'apocrypha ('catholic deuterocanon') and gnostic materials (Thomas, etc), they were never accepted as Canon in the OT, not even by Jesus' day, nor Josephus' day.

1) you need to cite your sources, and I believe you need to provide links rather than post long sections of quoted material.
2) None of this makes any difference. You've still chosen to disregard them. My point stands.

 

[coconut theology]

Here:
... the terms Hebrews, Israelites, and Jews are not interchangeable in all instances.

 

[coconut theology]

1) you need to cite your sources ....

Not sure what you think I have been doing (KJB, links, book references, page numbers, etc).

 

[coconut theology]

...2) None of this makes any difference. ...

To you. Others I still have hope for.

 

[sojourner]

Book, Chapter, Verse. Then I will show you quite mistaken from that same place in its context and language.

Nope. Not falling into that trap. I know perfectly well what Paul said; I don't intend to have you waste bandwidth in some misguided attempt to "teach" me something. If I wanted to learn more about the bible, I'd go to a bona fide bible scholar.

 

[sojourner]

Not sure what you think I have been doing (KJB, links, book references, page numbers, etc).

Not in the last post, you didn't.

 

[sojourner]

To you. Others I still have hope for.

My point still stands. The texts are there; you're excluding them. Just as you have accused others of doing.

 

[coconut theology]

Nope. ...

Exactly. The evidence you stand upon is "Nope.", when asked for.

 

[coconut theology]

Not in the last post, you didn't.

Yes, I did. Link to it, and I'll quote it to you.

 

[sojourner]

He is a member of the Clergy that also practices Shamanism (occult).

Wrong. This isn't an "occult" practice. You don't know anything about it, so I'll thank you to not misrepresent either it or me.

My experience is that he is not here for an open and honest discussion.

Look who's talking. You've evaded every point anyone has made with actual repeats of the posts they responded to.

He believes that the teachings and traditions of men that break the commandments of God that JESUS warns us about in MATTHEW 15:2-9 supersedes the Word of God.

Nope. That's now what Jesus warns about. Jesus gave the Church license to change and adapt. Additionally, the apostles' teaching takes more forms than simply the biblical texts. Always has. Since the beginning. This whole post of yours is a pack of lies.

 

[3rdAngel]

One cannot love "in the context of sin," for love is not present in sin.

This is something we agree on. Now if sin is defined in the scriptures as breaking any one of God's 10 commandments *JAMES 2:10-11; 1 JOHN 3:4; ROMANS 3:20; ROMANS 7:7, can you love God by breaking his 4th commandment?

 

[sojourner]

Not sure what you think I have been doing (KJB, links, book references, page numbers, etc).

Not sure what you think you've been doing...