Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Colossians Misunderstood - As Usual!
#5
Jerry: That's a whole discussion in itself...I thought it would be good to share because I see that it has some weight in determining what the Aramaic is saying <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile --> I'm of the persuasion that the Torah and circumcision were in no way abolished or annulled and that Yeshua was not its adversary or enemy: how can the fullness of Torah that we see in Mashiyach be an enemy of Torah? (Hebrews 4:9, 1Corinthians 5:7 ... ) Since the discussion started on AENT, and the AENT is also trying to show the same as I've mentioned, I thought it would be good to mention <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->. My main point is that once we understand the depths of spiritual meaning behind physical commands is not the action itself, but something that can be found in Mashiyach, it doesn't mean we should forget the physical but embrace it as the demonstration of the spiritual. If it were the case that the 'Jewish' things were abolished by Mashiyach, the Netzarim were wrong in many regards: and even the Scriptures in the most simple understanding show that people should not dissuade the sons of Israel from keeping the commandments... for me, I see that if the natural branches of Israel are to keep these things and the wild branches grafted beside Israel are to forsake them, then there is a double standard.

But in any case AENT says were because it's based on Murdock's work for everything after Acts 16.

I shall add it to my erratum data that I'm compiling for AGR.

Blessings All
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Colossians Misunderstood - As Usual! - by Aaron S - 03-28-2010, 04:47 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)