Replies

I don't mean legally. These Gentiles would not have been set up to butcher and prepare kosher food.

And where does it say in the Torah that a Gentile cannot be taught how to properly butcher and prepare kosher food?

Look, as a Messianic synagogue with both Jews and Gentiles as members, we deal with this on a regular basis. It's really not that incredibly hard to have a mixed group sharing food that is kosher. Granted that there are proscriptions in Orthodox Judaism against letting Gentiles prepare food, but those are matters of tradition, and not of Torah per se.

1 Corinthians 9:19

So then, it is your claim that Paul was a hypocrite, pretending to be observant only around Jews but hanging out with the prostitutes when he hung out with the Gentiles. Because really, that's what you're accusing him of.

Here, let me help by fixing the mistranslations you're a victim to:

For whereas I was free as to all, I made myself the servant of all, that I might gain the more. 20 And I became to the Jews, a Jew, that I might gain the Jews: 21 To them that are under the law, as if I were under the law, (whereas myself was not under the law,) that I might gain them that were under the law. To them that were lawless/wicked (anomos, which everywhere else in the NT is translated thus), as if I were lawless/wicked, (whereas I was not without the law of God, but was in the law of Christ,) that I might gain them that were without the law."

What Paul is really saying is that he put himself in everyone else's shoes in order to communicate with them the Gospel. How does one who is already a Jew "become" a Jew to the Jews? To the Jews, he spoke in Jewish terms. To the rabbis, in rabbinic terms. To the lawless--the Gentiles--he spoke in Gentile terms, quoting Greek philosophers and using Greek rhetorical styles, for example (as in Athens). But in all this, he insists that he was not lawless himself, but was in the Law of Messiah--that is, practicing the Torah as taught and practiced by Yeshua.

Nor was Paul the first Jew to learn to speak in Gentile terms without compromising the Torah. Rabbi Hillel, Philo, and Rabban Gamaliel--Paul's own teacher--were all known for using the same techniques. The difference was that Paul was supernaturally empowered by the Spirit in his work and was able to reap a great harvest accordingly by God's grace.

The latter-day rules of the Church were based on the teachings of the Apostles.

No, they really weren't. Seriously, go read the article on Acts 21 that I've already linked you to. The Apostles were all Torah-observant Jews and expected Jewish believers in Yeshua to be more zealous for the Torah, not less.

Apostolic successors were appointed by the original Apostles . . .

And priestly successors were appointed by Aaron. When was the last time you put yourself under the authority of a Cohen? For that matter, God Himself appointed a king over the northern kingdom--and when that kingly line grew corrupt, He removed them. God allowed the Herodians and Sadducees to rule over Judea, but nevertheless repudiated them through Yeshua and ultimately took their reign away. What makes you think that the corrupt successors of the Apostles would keep their offices in God's eyes for one minute more?

And before you try to quote Matthew 16 to me, I'll remind you that in Numbers 25:13, the Eternal One who does not change His mind (Num. 23:19) gave to Phinehas and his seed the covenant of an eternal priesthood. Not until the Messiah came--Eternal. This promise is reiterated in Jer. 33:18-22. When was the last time you honored a Cohen? Indeed, you have claimed that there is no eternal Levitial priesthood and called heretics those that trust the Word of God.

Why? Because all too well you annul the Word of God for your (relatively young and novel) tradition.

The Judaizers received a thumbs down from the Apostles

And Gentilizing Jews is the exact same sin played the other way. Out of your own mouth you condemn yourself.

How about the refugees from Goshen forced to adopt the Mosaic laws?

How about them?

Christ sent the Holy Spirit to inspire the Apostles to correctly teach the true meaning of the law.

And yet it is your claim that as of Acts 21, the Apostles still were not correctly teaching the Law.

But the authority to correctly teach and to make binding rulings (to bind and loose) does not give one the authority to change the Torah. Nor do miracles give one such authority. In fact, nothing does:

Whatever thing I command you, that you shall observe to do: you shall not add thereto, nor diminish from it. If there arise in the midst of you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and he give you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, “Let us go after other gods” (which you have not known) “and let us serve them”; you shall not listen to the words of that prophet, or to that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proves you, to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and you shall serve him, and cling to him. That prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death, because he has spoken rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to draw you aside out of the way which the LORD your God commanded you to walk in. So you shall put away the evil from the midst of you. (Deu. 12:32-13:5 [13:1-6 in Jewish Bibles]).

To claim that the Eternal One, who is not a man that He might change His mind, has changed His mind is the same as calling people to worship a God other than He. To claim authority as a prophet to change the Torah is worthy of death. God told the Jewish people to keep Sabbath, Passover, Yom Kippur, the other Feasts, kosher, and pretty much every other commandment that you have been telling us not to forever.

And that is why so few Jews believe in Yeshua--because you have misrepresented Him.

It wasn't enough for you to say, "I don't think that X, Y, and Z apply to me as a Gentile." That might be acceptable. I can make the case, for example, from the Torah that kosher is not incumbent on Gentiles. But the moment that you claimed the authority to interpret the Apostles in such a way as to draw aside Jews out of the way that the Eternal God commanded us to walk, you sinned against the Word and against the Jews.

If there is a heretic here, it is the one who claims that Yeshua is not enough for the salvation of the Jews, but that it takes Yeshua plus ceasing to be a Jew and becoming a Gentile. That is another "gospel," and let any who preach it, even an angel from Heaven, be anathema.

And where does it say in the Torah that a Gentile cannot be taught how to properly butcher and prepare kosher food?

You missed my point entirely. Those who prepared the meals Peter shared with Gentiles are not likely to have provided kosher service. At Cornelius' household, scripture explicitly describes Peter eating non-kosher food at the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and direction of an angel.

It is you who accuse Paul. I do not see anything wrong with him reasserting his status as Pharisee or going to the Temple. The Apostles did not immediately cut themselves off from all Mosaic law. They did deemphasize the law, and not only for Gentiles.

What makes you think that the corrupt successors of the Apostles would keep their offices in God's eyes for one minute more?

Bishops that pass along what they receive were not corrupt. Bishops that adopt novelty and heresy are condemned.

Not until the Messiah came--Eternal. This promise is reiterated in Jer. 33:18-22. When was the last time you honored a Cohen? Indeed, you have claimed that there is no eternal Levitial priesthood and called heretics those that trust the Word of God.

How would the imperfect animal sacrifices continue to please God after the perfect sacrifice has been made?

Heb 10:1 "For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. 4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. 11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, 14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified."

Why? Because all too well you annul the Word of God for your (relatively young and novel) tradition.

You are accusing either me, Christian Tradition, or the Apostles. The Holy Spirit inspired the Apostles to establish the Church according to God's will. Mosaic law was not permanent but provisional until the coming of Christ:

Galatians 3:19 "Why then was the law? It was set because of transgressions, until the seed should come, to whom he made the promise"

And Gentilizing Jews is the exact same sin played the other way. Out of your own mouth you condemn yourself.

The Church is infallibly guided in her legislation by the Paraclete. The refugees from Goshen adopted laws given to them by God. Converts who accept the laws of the Church bow not to Gentiles, but to God.

And that is why so few Jews believe in Yeshua--because you have misrepresented Him. It wasn't enough for you to say, "I don't think that X, Y, and Z apply to me as a Gentile." That might be acceptable. I can make the case, for example, from the Torah that kosher is not incumbent on Gentiles. But the moment that you claimed the authority to interpret the Apostles in such a way as to draw aside Jews out of the way that the Eternal God commanded us to walk, you sinned against the Word and against the Jews. If there is a heretic here, it is the one who claims that Yeshua is not enough for the salvation of the Jews, but that it takes Yeshua plus ceasing to be a Jew and becoming a Gentile. That is another "gospel," and let any who preach it, even an angel from Heaven, be anathema.

Again, I do not make the rules. You are putting the cart before the horse. If the Church is false, then you should cut all ties and be done with her. If the Church is true, then you must submit to her despite ties you have with anything else.