Self appointed Apostle Paul Vs Yashu'a teaching

[Ken Brown]

So you are agreeing that Paul says its okay to eat idol sacrificed meat as long as you think the idol means nothing.

And I suppose that in Revelation, the warning against those who said this was okay were Christians who were actively teaching that the idols were something? I don't think so.

So in Ancient Israel, the law against eating idol-sacrificed meat only applied if you actually thought the idol represented something significant?

Hi Sherman, yes, that was Paul's thinking. When a believer ends their relationship with following after the pagan deities, and no longer participates in paying homage to or worshiping those idols and gods, then their MINDS are cleansed from that former way of life, and they look at how they used to be in worshiping those idols as foolishness. Why, because that idol and god is meaningless, and has no power over them. All Paul was doing for them is letting them partake of a piece of meat that meant NOTHING to them except food, no appeasement to a false god/idol, nothing like that. Once a person gets that far in believing in the One True Elohim, what will eating a piece of meat do to them? The sin was to believe in that idol and participate in worshiping it, not in eating a piece of meat. Paul was getting at the CORE of why meat should not be eaten that was offered to an idol, and if you believed in that idol/god, Paul would tell you that you must forsake eating sacrifices from that idol/god. And yes, in Revelations, those were weak believers who were falling back in to thinking the idol food was blessed by that deity.

Shermana, Christmas is a perfect example. I'm sure you do not believe in celebrating or worshiping that pagan festival, but if you walk into Sams and they have some sample "christmas" cookies, is it a sin for you to partake? KB

 

[Pegg]

In Romans 14, he basically says you can do your own thing and that eating meat sacrificed to idols is OK if you don't take offense.

I think if you examine his words carefully, that is not what he is saying at all.

4 Now concerning the eating of foods offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5 For even though there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him.
7 "Nevertheless, there is not this knowledge (knowledge that idol gods are not real)in all persons; but some, being accustomed until now to the idol, eat food as something sacrificed to an idol(ie, they eat with reverence to the idol god as if it is a real god worthy of worship), and their conscience, being weak, is defiled"

Paul is really saying that when pagans sacrifice their food to an idol, it is a defiling practice. The pagans eat that same meat with a type of reverence to their idol gods...and that is what is 'defiling'.,... this is in harmony with the mosiac law which states that idolatry is a sin. Eating sacrificed meat in this way is a form of idolatry, it is sin because God says "you must have no other Gods against my face" .

Now he continues that if the meat is not eaten with such reverence, then it is 'nothing bad' to eat it because no devotion to a false god is being given to it.
8 But food will not commend us to God; if we do not eat, we do not fall short, and, if we eat, we have no credit to ourselves. Why?
Because only those who eat with 'reverence to the idol' are practicing idolatry. If i eat the meat without the motive of showing honor to the idol, then its not idolatry.

HOWEVER, not all people view it this way as Paul goes onto explain. Some new christians who were previous idol worshipers, may become confused at seeing another christian eat such meat. They may think that by eating the meat the christian is showing reverence to the idol god for whom the meat was sacrificed. The fact that we are even having this discussion right now is also evidence that some will become stumbled at the eating of such meat as Shermana is... so Paul says:
9 But keep watching that this authority of YOURS does not somehow become a stumbling block to those who are weak. 10 For if anyone should see you, the one having knowledge, reclining at a meal in an idol temple, will not the conscience of that one who is weak be built up to the point of eating foods offered to idols? 11 Really, by your knowledge, the man that is weak is being ruined, [your] brother for whose sake Christ died. 12 But when YOU people thus sin against YOUR brothers and wound their conscience that is weak, YOU are sinning against Christ. 13 Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat flesh at all, that I may not make my brother stumble.

Do you see the point that Paul is making here?

Idol gods are not real gods, so eating the food that may have been sacrificed to them cannot defile you unless you actually view that god as a real god and eat that meat with reverence for that particular god. But Christians had knowledge that all idol gods are false gods... not real gods. So they would never eat the meat as a form of devotion to the false god.... but some christians might be stumbled at seeing you eat such meat, so if thats the case, dont eat it.... Paul said if that was the case he would prefer to never eat any meat again.

 

[Pegg]

For starters Pegg, does Psalm 68:18 say he "gave gifts" or that he "Received gifts"?

Makes a HUGE difference in the context. This is a famous issue Pegg, I'm far from the only to point this out.

Let's see what your NWT translates it as:

18You have ascended on high;
You have carried away captives;
You have taken gifts in the form of men,
Yes, even the stubborn ones, to reside [among them], O Jah God.

Oops.

I don't know how this one slipped by so easily. Even the apologists for this have some very cringe-worthy defenses, along the lines of it being okay to change a Bible verse if it suits your sermon or something.

I dont know what your issue with this verse is? You havnt really explained why you think its mean misinterpreted or misapplied by Paul, nor have you said what you think the verse should mean.

???

 

[Shermana]

I dont know what your issue with this verse is? You havnt really explained why you think its mean misinterpreted or misapplied by Paul, nor have you said what you think the verse should mean.

???

Does Psalm 68:18 say "Give gifts to them" or "Receive gifts from them"?

 

[Shermana]

I think if you examine his words carefully, that is not what he is saying at all.

4 Now concerning the eating of foods offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5 For even though there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him.
7 "Nevertheless, there is not this knowledge (knowledge that idol gods are not real)in all persons; but some, being accustomed until now to the idol, eat food as something sacrificed to an idol(ie, they eat with reverence to the idol god as if it is a real god worthy of worship), and their conscience, being weak, is defiled"

Paul is really saying that when pagans sacrifice their food to an idol, it is a defiling practice. The pagans eat that same meat with a type of reverence to their idol gods...and that is what is 'defiling'.,... this is in harmony with the mosiac law which states that idolatry is a sin. Eating sacrificed meat in this way is a form of idolatry, it is sin because God says "you must have no other Gods against my face" .

Now he continues that if the meat is not eaten with such reverence, then it is 'nothing bad' to eat it because no devotion to a false god is being given to it.
8 But food will not commend us to God; if we do not eat, we do not fall short, and, if we eat, we have no credit to ourselves. Why?
Because only those who eat with 'reverence to the idol' are practicing idolatry. If i eat the meat without the motive of showing honor to the idol, then its not idolatry.

HOWEVER, not all people view it this way as Paul goes onto explain. Some new christians who were previous idol worshipers, may become confused at seeing another christian eat such meat. They may think that by eating the meat the christian is showing reverence to the idol god for whom the meat was sacrificed. The fact that we are even having this discussion right now is also evidence that some will become stumbled at the eating of such meat as Shermana is... so Paul says:
9 But keep watching that this authority of YOURS does not somehow become a stumbling block to those who are weak. 10 For if anyone should see you, the one having knowledge, reclining at a meal in an idol temple, will not the conscience of that one who is weak be built up to the point of eating foods offered to idols? 11 Really, by your knowledge, the man that is weak is being ruined, [your] brother for whose sake Christ died. 12 But when YOU people thus sin against YOUR brothers and wound their conscience that is weak, YOU are sinning against Christ. 13 Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat flesh at all, that I may not make my brother stumble.

Do you see the point that Paul is making here?

Idol gods are not real gods, so eating the food that may have been sacrificed to them cannot defile you unless you actually view that god as a real god and eat that meat with reverence for that particular god. But Christians had knowledge that all idol gods are false gods... not real gods. So they would never eat the meat as a form of devotion to the false god.... but some christians might be stumbled at seeing you eat such meat, so if thats the case, dont eat it.... Paul said if that was the case he would prefer to never eat any meat again.

So when Revelation warns against false Christians who teach to eat meat to idols, you're saying that these false Christian teachers were actively teaching idolatry?

What exactly was Revelation warning against?

 

[Shermana]

Hi Sherman, yes, that was Paul's thinking. When a believer ends their relationship with following after the pagan deities, and no longer participates in paying homage to or worshiping those idols and gods, then their MINDS are cleansed from that former way of life, and they look at how they used to be in worshiping those idols as foolishness. Why, because that idol and god is meaningless, and has no power over them. All Paul was doing for them is letting them partake of a piece of meat that meant NOTHING to them except food, no appeasement to a false god/idol, nothing like that. Once a person gets that far in believing in the One True Elohim, what will eating a piece of meat do to them? The sin was to believe in that idol and participate in worshiping it, not in eating a piece of meat. Paul was getting at the CORE of why meat should not be eaten that was offered to an idol, and if you believed in that idol/god, Paul would tell you that you must forsake eating sacrifices from that idol/god. And yes, in Revelations, those were weak believers who were falling back in to thinking the idol food was blessed by that deity.

Shermana, Christmas is a perfect example. I'm sure you do not believe in celebrating or worshiping that pagan festival, but if you walk into Sams and they have some sample "christmas" cookies, is it a sin for you to partake? KB

Personally I do believe that eating anything marketed as "Christmas" anything is partaking in the pagan festivities. I see no reason to think that in Revelation, the Christian teachers telling to indulge in idol-sacrificed meat were saying it had anything to do with actual idolatry.

By this logic, one could technically bow down to statues if commanded if they thought the statues meant nothing. But Daniel refused to bow down to them, yet he acknowledged it as a meaningless statue. Where's the difference?

 

[Ken Brown]

Personally I do believe that eating anything marketed as "Christmas" anything is partaking in the pagan festivities. I see no reason to think that in Revelation, the Christian teachers telling to indulge in idol-sacrificed meat were saying it had anything to do with actual idolatry.

By this logic, one could technically bow down to statues if commanded if they thought the statues meant nothing. But Daniel refused to bow down to them, yet he acknowledged it as a meaningless statue. Where's the difference?

Hi Shermana, the difference is that the bowing down serves no other purpose than showing your allegiance, where the eating of a piece of meat is something that can be done without showing or indicating any allegiance or belief towards the idol/god.

Something that you might consider is that fact that the "butcher shops" in that time frame were at the pagan temples. Now, if that is where the meat was obtained for the most part in the Gentile cities, how would one acquire meat?

Another question on Christmas, will you enter into a store that is playing "christmas" music and give them your business? KB

 

[Shermana]

Hi Shermana, the difference is that the bowing down serves no other purpose than showing your allegiance, where the eating of a piece of meat is something that can be done without showing or indicating any allegiance or belief towards the idol/god.

What's the difference between eating a piece of meat sacrificed to an idol and bowing down to an idol if you think the idol is meaningless? If I believe I'm not really bowing down to a god, and someone forces me to bow down, like how Daniel was asked but refused, where's the line?

Something that you might consider is that fact that the "butcher shops" in that time frame were at the pagan temples. Now, if that is where the meat was obtained for the most part in the Gentile cities, how would one acquire meat?

I'd like to see evidence that most of the meat back then was acquired only in pagan temples and that there wasn't easy access to meat apart from that. It's next to impossible for many Jews to find Kosher meat in most places of the world if they don't live by a Jewish community, does that mean they are now allowed to eat non-kosher meat because it's inconvenient based on where they live? Why not have Christian butchers if the communities were large enough? No one could afford a bull?

Another question on Christmas, will you enter into a store that is playing "christmas" music and give them your business? KB

I hear Christmas music starting in October for one thing. There's a difference between having a Christmas specific item like "Christmas Cookies" and a "Holiday sale". Besides, the difference between a store itself celebrating a pagan festival is far different than actually being made in honor of a specific god, so the comparison is not nearly as concrete.

 

[Ken Brown]

What's the difference between eating a piece of meat sacrificed to an idol and bowing down to an idol if you think the idol is meaningless? If I believe I'm not really bowing down to a god, and someone forces me to bow down, like how Daniel was asked but refused, where's the line?

I'd like to see evidence that most of the meat back then was acquired only in pagan temples and that there wasn't easy access to meat apart from that. It's next to impossible for many Jews to find Kosher meat in most places of the world if they don't live by a Jewish community, does that mean they are now allowed to eat non-kosher meat because it's inconvenient based on where they live? Why not have Christian butchers if the communities were large enough? No one could afford a bull?
I hear Christmas music starting in October for one thing. There's a difference between having a Christmas specific item like "Christmas Cookies" and a "Holiday sale". Besides, the difference between a store itself celebrating a pagan festival is far different than actually being made in honor of a specific god, so the comparison is not nearly as concrete.

Hi Shermana, conerning the bowing down to an idol. When Daniel refused, it was like when Paul said to refuse the meat when someone told you it was offered to an idol. This would be a statement validating your open stance against the idol, just a Daniel made an open statement against that god by not bowing down to it. If he would have done that, (even though he KNOWS that god is nothing), he would have offended the conscience of all those who were challenging him (they would have thought that Daniel was worshiping or validating their god). Do you see the comparison?

Also, I'm fairly certain the meat markets were centered around the pagan temples and maybe not all animals slaughtered were offered to the idol god, but I think the meats were intermixed to where one would have to ask if it was offered or not.

Many years ago, our assembly was faced with a difficult decision. We follow Lev 11 and Deu 14 according to what Elohim deemed as clean for us to eat, and one day we found out that cheese is cultured from an enzyme called rennet. These enzymes convert the fluid milk into a semi-solid mass as one of the steps in the manufacture of cheese. The problem is that in labeling the cheese, all the label says it has rennet, or microbial rennet (non-animal), or enzymes, and it doesn't tell where the rennet comes from. It can either come from calves stomachs, swines, or vegetable, and I can tell you from practice, it is a difficult process to call cheese companies and find out what rennet they used. As a group, we decided that Yeshua did not want us straining at a gnat for something that we all felt was like having to wash our hands ritually before eating. So we decided on a dispensation to not try to verify which rennet the cheeses were made with.

Paul's decision about eating meat offered to idols did influence us with our decision. It was not in our hearts to defiantly eat anything unclean and I think our decision was the correct one. What is your opinion? Do you verify all cheese and gelatin products before you eat them? Do you ever take any joint supplements? We truly want to be doing what is right. KB

 

[Pegg]

Does Psalm 68:18 say "Give gifts to them" or "Receive gifts from them"?

If i read it in the hebrew, it says:

You ascend to the heights you capture captivity, you take gifts in the human and indeed ones being stubborn to, to tabernacle of El Elohim

When David wrote this psalm, he was referring to the the men taken captive during the conquest of the promised land. Some of those captives worked at the tabernacle as assistants to the levites as Ezra 8:20 mentions.

Paul is simply applying that same situation, of captives becoming servants of God, to the newly formed christians. Prior they had been slaves in satans world, now they were willing slaves of Christ.

Im not sure why you think that is a 'wrong interpretation' ...Paul isnt giving an interpretation of the verse... he's merely using it as a way to illustrate a point.

 

[Pegg]

So when Revelation warns against false Christians who teach to eat meat to idols, you're saying that these false Christian teachers were actively teaching idolatry?

What exactly was Revelation warning against?

eating it 'TO THE IDOL' is an act of idolatry because it is eating for the purpose of giving reverence to the idol... and Paul points that out when he says being accustomed until now to the idol, eat food as something sacrificed to an idol and their conscience, being weak, is defiled"

So you have to be clear here.... are you eating it to revere the idol god, or are you eating it because it is a source of food provided by God?

If you eat with the right view, then there is no problem with it.

 

[Shermana]

If i read it in the hebrew, it says:

You ascend to the heights you capture captivity, you take gifts in the human and indeed ones being stubborn to, to tabernacle of El Elohim

When David wrote this psalm, he was referring to the the men taken captive during the conquest of the promised land. Some of those captives worked at the tabernacle as assistants to the levites as Ezra 8:20 mentions.

Paul is simply applying that same situation, of captives becoming servants of God, to the newly formed christians. Prior they had been slaves in satans world, now they were willing slaves of Christ.



Im not sure why you think that is a 'wrong interpretation' ...Paul isnt giving an interpretation of the verse... he's merely using it as a way to illustrate a point.

So you don't even agree with the way your NWT translates it?

It says "You receive gifts from among men". It means that people gave tribute to God. Ephesians simply does not quote Psalm 68:18 correctly at all, it gives a completely different context. I fail to see how your defense remotely addresses this.

Paul says that God gave gifts to the men. David says God received gifts and Tribute.

I hope I'm clear this time.

Psalm 68:18 Hebrew Texts and Analysis

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
You have ascended on high, you have led captivity captive: you have received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.
American King James Version
You have ascended on high, you have led captivity captive: you have received gifts for men; yes, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.
American Standard Version
Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led away captives; Thou hast received gifts among men, Yea, among the rebellious also, that Jehovah God might dwell with them .
Douay-Rheims Bible
Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive; thou hast received gifts in men. Yea for those also that do not believe, the dwelling of the Lord God.
Darby Bible Translation
Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts in Man, and even for the rebellious, for the dwelling there of Jah Elohim.
English Revised Version
Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led thy captivity captive; thou hast received gifts among men, yea, among the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell with them.
Webster's Bible Translation
Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive: thou hast received gifts for men; yes, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them.
World English Bible
You have ascended on high. You have led away captives. You have received gifts among men, yes, among the rebellious also, that Yah God might dwell there.
Young's Literal Translation
Thou hast ascended on high, Thou hast taken captive captivity, Thou hast taken gifts for men, That even the refractory may rest, O Jah God.






Ephesians 4:8New International Version (©2011)
This is why it says: "When he ascended on high, he took many captives and gave gifts to his people."
New Living Translation (©2007)
That is why the Scriptures say, "When he ascended to the heights, he led a crowd of captives and gave gifts to his people."
English Standard Version (©2001)
Therefore it says, “When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men.”
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
Therefore it says, "WHEN HE ASCENDED ON HIGH, HE LED CAPTIVE A HOST OF CAPTIVES, AND HE GAVE GIFTS TO MEN."




It's quite simple, you'd have to be deliberately being evasive to not see the blatant difference here.


The Hebrew says God RECEIVED gifts, Ephesians says God GAVE gifts.


What part don't YOU understand? Do you really not understand what's going in this blatant contradiction?

I should make a whole thread on this one! This is a famous problem with Ephesians, Pegg, is this the first time you've heard of this one?

 

[Shermana]

eating it 'TO THE IDOL' is an act of idolatry because it is eating for the purpose of giving reverence to the idol... and Paul points that out when he says being accustomed until now to the idol, eat food as something sacrificed to an idol and their conscience, being weak, is defiled"

So you have to be clear here.... are you eating it to revere the idol god, or are you eating it because it is a source of food provided by God?

If you eat with the right view, then there is no problem with it.

So what was Revelation warning against? False Christian teachers who taught to actually eat to the idols?

 

[Pegg]

By this logic, one could technically bow down to statues if commanded if they thought the statues meant nothing. But Daniel refused to bow down to them, yet he acknowledged it as a meaningless statue. Where's the difference?

thats a bad example because they were bowing down specifically as an act of worship to the idol... the king made that very clear as the reason for bowing down.

 

[Pegg]

So what was Revelation warning against? False Christian teachers who taught to actually eat to the idols?

what verse in revelation?

 

[Pegg]

Shermana, do you think its acceptable for a christian to eat Halal meat?

 

[Pegg]

So you don't even agree with the way your NWT translates it?

It says "You receive gifts from among men". It means that people gave tribute to God. Ephesians simply does not quote Psalm 68:18 correctly at all, it gives a completely different context. I fail to see how your defense remotely addresses this.

Paul says that God gave gifts to the men. David says God received gifts and Tribute.

I hope I'm clear this time.

I should make a whole thread on this one! This is a famous problem with Ephesians, Pegg, is this the first time you've heard of this one?

what was the situation David was writing about? Who were the captives he is speaking about???

He's speaking of the captives taken by Isrealites who became servants at the Tabernacle.


When Christ came, did he take captives? Yes he did. And did they come to serve God in his heavenly tabernacle? Yes they did. He is not trying to explain what happened back there with the ancient Israelites... he's simply applying the same situation occuring among christians.

 

[Shermana]

what was the situation David was writing about? Who were the captives he is speaking about???

He's speaking of the captives taken by Isrealites who became servants at the Tabernacle.


When Christ came, did he take captives? Yes he did. And did they come to serve God in his heavenly tabernacle? Yes they did. He is not trying to explain what happened back there with the ancient Israelites... he's simply applying the same situation occuring among christians.

Pegg....seriously....please.

I know you understand what's going on here. Please, don't avoid it.

Ephesians 4:8 said God GAVE gifts.

Psalm 68:18 says that God RECEIVED gifts.

It's that simple.

Ephesians misquotes Psalm 68:18 and changes the entire context.

Should I make a whole thread for this?

And what "captives" did Christ even take? Is it anything close to the same meaning of "captives" in Psalms 68?

 

[Shermana]

Otherwise, please flat out admit that you believe that Ephesians is NOT directly quoting Psalm 68:18, that will clear up some confusion, even though Ephesians directly implies its quoting Psalm 68:18, if you feel its NOT quoting Psalm 68:18 directly but is in fact changing the text, then we can move on.

But if you're insisting that Ephesians 4:8 does in fact quote Psalm 68:18 correctly and in the exact same context, which it is implying that it does....

 

[Pegg]

Pegg....seriously....please.

I know you understand what's going on here. Please, don't avoid it.

Ephesians 4:8 said God GAVE gifts.

Psalm 68:18 says that God RECEIVED gifts.

It's that simple.

Ephesians misquotes Psalm 68:18 and changes the entire context.

Should I make a whole thread for this?

And what "captives" did Christ even take? Is it anything close to the same meaning of "captives" in Psalms 68?

Have you read Ezra's account?

Im guessing you havn't... but here it is:

Ezra 8:20 And from the Neth′i·nim, whom David and the princes gave to the service of the Levites, two hundred and twenty Neth′i·nim, all of whom had been designated by [their] names.

The army fought, the army took the captives, then the army gave those captives to the Levitical priesthood. Thus God both received them and gave them. He recieved them from David, then gave them to the Levites to be used in service.

Paul is not saying anything incorrectly here. I think you are simply playing with semantics because you dont like Paul.