Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
Tom Steele | PentecostalTheology.com
You don’t have to be a Jew, a Christian, or even have a Bible in your possession to discover some truths. This is an old proverb from the Cree, one of a number of Native American Civilizations:
“Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realize we cannot eat money.”
If you have been following this ministry, and especially if you have read through the blogs on creation and healthy living, you will know that God’s Word places an obligation on us to maintain the balance of creation and provides for us the details on how we are to do that. Get plugged in and be part of this movement to bring the world back to God, both naturally and spiritually.
Bertrum Sage [09/27/2015 9:25 PM]
Really ….ancients knew …about $$$……….
Tom Steele [09/27/2015 9:29 PM]
Well, let’s see, money existed in Jesus’ day over 2,000 years ago and Europeans settled in the Americas a few hundred years ago. I would say it’s possible that Native Americans knew about money at some point a long time ago, so it would depend on the interpretation of the term ‘ancient’. How old does something have to be? Many times an antique is only 40 or 50 years old, but one might consider that ‘ancient’.
Bertrum Sage [09/27/2015 10:02 PM]
Hear you ..but with the existing conservation efforts have been +/- seems can’t get all sides ..on side as long as some feel free to take more than what’s legal or right ..and as long as politicians are left to manage the issue???
But I believe civilized vfolls won’t let it come to a dire statement
Last fish ..last river Last duck
last deer last last last etc etc
Tom Steele [09/27/2015 10:12 PM]
I have blogged recently, population statistics show that in about another 500 years or so the world’s human population would provide only about a one meter square of available land for every human on earth. We wouldn’t live to see that, of course, but that day may come… of course, I believe, based on research provided in the same blogs, that we will see the return of the Lord before that time ever comes.
John Kissinger [09/28/2015 7:26 AM]
500 years ago about 500 people prophesied and wrote blog articles that we will not be here in 500 years, and yet here we are…
Bertrum Sage [09/28/2015 8:16 AM]
And about500000 folks from sandunes floating across oceans …to use up space somewhere else in the world
Tom Steele [09/28/2015 8:18 AM]
They had blogs (short for ‘web log’) 500 years ago? But really, yes, people have prophesied stuff that has not come true, but the THEORY I referenced is based on population statistics and growth trends of human beings. People can make stuff up and lie about things, but numbers don’t lie. Short of a major event altering these trends in a major way, it is very possible for humans to overpopulate the Earth in the very near future. (Side Note: a good example of a major event would be the return of Jesus and the establishment of His Kingdom. Since there seems to be so few actual true Believers in the world compared to those who reject God, we likely would not overpopulate the Earth during the Millennial Reign, assuming that people are even capable of bearing children during that time, I know some people believe that we will be living in a glorified state when that happens.)
Bertrum Sage [09/28/2015 8:25 AM]
Profesy? ?1/3 of world population is lost in great plaugue /war …then consider valley of jehausifat final big battle…losing lot of folks
Tom Steele [09/28/2015 8:33 AM]
Yep, that’s all in their, isn’t it! When you look at the numbers, and consider that the size of armies mentioned in the Bible for these end time events weren’t even humanly possible until populations grew to these grand numbers, we are truly living in the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. I don’t believe we will ever see the estimated overgrowth of human population come to pass, nor do I believe that we would ever see the ‘last tree’ or catch the ‘last fish’ mentioned in the above Cree proverb, Jesus will certainly return and establish His Kingdom on the Earth before any of that can actually happen. And it is true, a lot of people will be consumed in the process, but they all have a chance to come to Christ before then.
Bertrum Sage [09/28/2015 8:55 AM]
Amazing how silent pulpits are on subject…apparently sheep .. (as in Over Shepherd ..leader of Sheep),,….metafore ……..Sheep already know details on the times to come
John Kissinger [09/28/2015 10:22 AM]
pulpits dont talk – preachers do
Varnel Watson
This is 100% true Tom Steele anything else is extreme legalism brought by modern day judeisers to the Christian Church
Tom Steele
That is true, you don’t have to be a Jew to be a Christian. Let’s look at the facts:
1. The Jews are only one of the twelve tribes of Israel, the tribe of Judah, so they are only a fraction of the actual Israelites or Hebrew people.
2. Christianity is made up of tens of thousands of “sects”, generally called denominations with a bunch of “non-denominational” Churches sprinkled on top to make things even more confusing. In many cases this multitude of sects cannot agree on even essential doctrine. Not all of them are right, and indeed I would say many of them are wrong even about essential doctrines. So, right there, you can be a “Christian” and not even be right about essential doctrine about things like, oh, say…. salvation issues.
3. It is well-known that the Jews created a whole bunch of man-made laws that were not a part of God’s Torah. These are recorded in the Mishnah and the Talmud. There is nothing essentially wrong with these teachings, in proper context they are no different than today’s Pastors and Preachers taking the Bible and attempting to teach the meaning behind it. The problem was that Jewish sages and rabbis took these more modern (at the time) man-made rules and elevated them to a level equal to or even greater than the authority of the Torah itself. Torah is Scripture, Mishnah/Talmud is not. This act of taking man-made laws and elevating them to a level equal to or greater than Scripture is one of only two things that can legitimately be referred to as legalism.
4. The only other thing that can be referred to a legalism is the act of teaching obedience to Scripture itself as a means of earning or maintaining salvation. If one teaches obedience to the Bible being the RESULT of genuinely being saved, they are not being legalistic and they are not Judaizing. The Torah was given when all the tribes of Israel were together, when they left Egypt. Also, Scripture tells us that there was a “mixed multitude” that left Egypt, it was not just Israelites (the twelve tribes). There were “strangers” and “sojourners” among them… these were… get this… GENTILES.
5. Nobody will agree that it is Judaizing to speak against murder, lying, stealing, homosexuality, etc. Nobody would say that the covenant of marriage is an exclusively Jewish thing and marriage unions of a man and a woman are a form of Judaizing. Indeed, most “Christians” keep most of the Torah, even if they don’t realize it. The only thing it seems that “Christians” have an issue with are a handful of things that they don’t understand, like the food laws, the Sabbath, the Feasts, and maybe a few miscellaneous things like not mixing wool and linen together in clothing (but that is almost irrelevant, you rarely see this combination in fabrics today). Incidentally, these are the type of “Torah commandments” that would actually make a Believer stand out as being “separate” from the world. After all, the heathen believe it is a moral standard not to lie, steal, murder, or commit any types of sexual immorality. Nobody is “coming out from the world and being separate” by obeying Bible rules that are held as moral standards by the God-deniers of the world.
So no, you don’t have to be a Jew to be a Christian. But in most cases, you can be a Christian without living in obedience to the Bible and that is a very wrong place to be. The majority of Christians simply are not really saved. And if you need me to back that up with statements from some of the most highly regarded Protestant Evangelical ministers of modern times—though some have gone on to their eternal destiny—I will be glad to do it. I have it all documented in an article I wrote. But I know how much you loath reading any theological treatise I have written, despite your group being called “Pentecostal Theology”. Sometimes I think you’d be better off renaming your group to be called “Troy Day’s Heavily Biased View Of What He Thinks Pentecostal Theology Is”.
Tom Steele
https://www.facebook.com/notes/truth-ignited/the-narrow-path-part-one/810532039108231/
Varnel Watson
Tom Steele I like what Joshua A. Humphries just said: God created the Mosaic covenant and men still couldn’t even get close to keeping it
Tom Steele
It’s funny how God said in Deuteronomy 30 that keeping it is EASY. Isn’t it!
Tom Steele
Of course the Law was given to clearly identify sin, Apostle Paul makes that perfectly clear in his writings. John as well, when he said in 1 John 3:4 that sin is the transgression of the Law/Torah.
So then, is we are free from or “saved” from sin, as the Scripture declares, then we are free from or “saved” from transgressing the Torah. Obviously that is the complete opposite of being free from keeping the Torah.
In the same article I shared, that you deleted, in a previous comment I quote a man named A.W. Pink who gives the best discourse I think I have ever read about the difference between being saved from sin and the “wrong” concept of most of the Christian Church of being saved from hell. I’d share the link to the article again, but you will just delete it I’m sure. So, if anyone on this chain wants to read the full article, let me know and I will tell you how to access it. In the meantime, I will go ahead and pull the excerpt from Reverend Pink and put it in a comment. Hopefully it does not get deleted that way.
Tom Steele
The nature of Christ’s salvation is woefully misrepresented by the present day “evangelist.” He announces a Saviour from Hell, rather than a Savior from sin. And that is why so many are fatally deceived, for there are multitudes who wish to escape the Lake of fire who have no desire to be delivered from their carnality and worldliness. The very first thing said of Him in the N.T. is, “thous shalt call His name Jesus, for He shall save His people (not “from the wrath to come,” but) from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). Christ is a Saviour for those realizing something of the exceeding sinfulness of sin, who feel the awful burden of it on their conscience, who loathe themselves for it, who long to be freed from its terrible dominion; and a Savior for no others. Were He to “save from Hell” those who were still in love with sin, He would be the minister of sin, condoning their wickedness and siding with them against God. What an unspeakably horrible and blasphemous thing with which to charge the Holy One!
Should the reader exclaim, I was not conscious of the heinousness of sin nor bowed down with a sense of my guilt when Christ saved me. Then we unhesitatingly reply, Either you have never been saved at all, or you were not saved as early as you supposed. True, as the Christian grows in grace he has a clearer realization of what sin is—rebellion against God—and a deeper hatred of and sorrow for it; but to think that one may be saved by Christ whose conscience has never been smitten by the Spirit and whose heart has not been made contrite before God, is to imagine something which has no existence whatever in the realm of fact. “They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick” (Matt. 9:12): the only ones who really seek relief from the great Physician are they that are sick of sin—who long to be delivered from its God-dishonouring works and its soul-defiling pollutions.
Inasmuch, then, as Christ’s salvation is a salvation from sin—from the love of it, from its dominion, from its guilt and penalty—then it necessarily follows that the first great task and the chief work of the evangelist is to preach upon SIN: to define what sin (as distinct from crime) really is, to show wherein its infinite enormity consists; to trace its manifold workings in the heart; to indicate that nothing less than eternal punishment is its desert. Ah, and preaching upon—sin not merely uttering a few platitudes concerning it, but devoting sermon after sermon to explaining what sin is in the sight of God—will not make him popular nor draw crowds, will it? No, it will not, and knowing this, those who love the praise of men more than the approbation of God, and who value their salary above immortal souls, trim their sails accordingly. “But such preaching will drive people away!” We answer, far better drive the people away by faithful preaching than drive the Holy Spirit away by unfaithfully pandering to the flesh.
The terms of Christ’s salvation are erroneously stated by the present-day evangelist. With very rare exceptions he tells his hearers that salvation is by grace and is received as a free gift; that Christ has done everything for the sinner, and nothing remains but for him to “believe”—to trust in the infinite merits of His blood. And so widely does this conception now prevail in “orthodox” circles, so frequently has it been dinned in their ears, so deeply has it taken root in their minds, that for one to now challenge it and denounce it as being so inadequate and one-sided as to be deceptive and erroneous, is for him to instantly court the stigma of being a heretic, and to be charged with dishonouring the finished work of Christ by inculcating salvation by works. Yet, notwithstanding, the writer is quite prepared to run that risk.
A.W. Pink (1886-1952), from his theological work titled “Studies In The Scriptures 1937b — 1938, Volume 9 of 17” (Available online through Google Books)
Varnel Watson
Love Pink, but he was a dead Calvinist #NOTgood
Tom Steele
I realize he was a Calvinist, but he was dead RIGHT about what he said in that citation I shared. I was also very surprised when I found this excerpt and saw that a Calvinist was capable of making such an on-point statement. But then they do say even a broke clock is right twice a day.
Question: How come you get to post links to other articles in comments and I don’t?
Varnel Watson
Tom Steele I love reading Pink. Glad you mentioned him. He is very very insightful in his commentaries and we use him a lot with my students. Too bad some reformed nominalists cite him in their favor, which he was far from IMO
Tom Steele
Well, you probably should have read my whole article then instead of deleting the comment where I shared it. But I’m sure by now you know where to access all of my blogs. If not here is the link:
http://www.truthignitedministry.wordpress.com
The one I had shared was titled “The Narrow Path, Part 1”. I also have a Part 2. I quote others you might like too, such as Tozer, Reidhead, and I think Ravenhill (I know I have cited Ravenhill, I love his work too, but can’t remember off the top of my head if I used any of his work in that message). You’ll probably actually like everything listed in that “series” of messages, even if you still think my other work is “legalistic Judaizing”, even though it clearly is not. Judaizing is trying to get people to follow Jewish man-made laws from the Talmud and stuff, not calling people to obey the Bible, of which the Torah is a part. But I won’t bother getting into that with you right now.
Varnel Watson
Not sure if I have read or even seen what you are referring to? Lately FB has been restricting and even deleting fake news blogs
Tom Steele
Well, somehow the comment I posted with a link to my blog that cited Pink and others is gone from here. I assumed it was you. You have to admit you have a track record, but if you did not delete it then I will retract my accusation that you did. Either way, you have the link now to my archive page, you can go through all of my works. And you really should go through them if you intend to continue wrongly accusing me of legalism and Judaizing.
Varnel Watson
Well you know assuming … was it to your blog or to a facebook entity?
Tom Steele
It was just the direct link to my blog, the one I mentioned titled “The Narrow Path, Part 1”
Tom Steele
Not a big deal… if you didn’t delete it, we’re good.
Varnel Watson
back to OP Tom Steele nominism, legalism are all in the foundation of jewish roots. One cannot but help to wonder what else?
Tom Steele
Once again, Troy Day, read through all of my work and THEN decide whether I teach legalism, nominism, or whatever other label you want to put on it.
Varnel Watson
Tom Steele I’ve read most of what you’ve posted since 2015 but who can read it all? Have you read through all my work? Are you now saying you do not defend nominism via Jewish roots?
Tom Steele
Can you define “nominism”? I tried to Google it, but the term did not come up anywhere. It keeps defaulting to “nominalism” which appears to have to do with metaphysics and philosphy.
I defend following the Bible… a HEBREW book written by HEBREW people about the HEBREW God from the perspective of ancient HEBREW culture. There is nothing “Christian” about the Bible, and “Pentecost” is a Feast of God from the Torah. So, Pentecostalism is completely based on what you call a “Jewish Feast”.
Do you have a blog? I would be glad to read through it. Perhaps I can return the favor and tell you everything you are wrong about like I just got done doing with a group of former SDAs who wrote against the Sabbath because they were bitter about being part of a cult group. Those are probably the 2-part blog you were talking about I am guessing… I will be putting them out the first one on the 18th and the second part on the 25th of this month.
Tom Steele
OK, I switched to Bing and found a term “Covenantal nomism”. Not “nominism”, but maybe it is the view you are trying to convey. I found these two paragraphs describing this view:
Covenantal nomism, in opposition to merit theology, is the belief that 1st century Jews in the land of Israel did not believe in works righteousness. Essentially, it is the belief that one is brought into the Abrahamic covenant through birth and stays in the covenant through works. E. P. Sanders and other proponents of Covenantal nomism do not ask the question of whether this is simply another type of works righteousness, since works are necessary to maintain standing in the covenant. It suggests that the Jewish view of relationship with God is that keeping the law is based only on a prior understanding of relationship with God.
The “structure” of covenantal nomism can be described as follows: (1) God has chosen Israel and (2) given the law. The law implies both (3) God’s promise to maintain the election and (4) the requirement to obey. (5) God rewards obedience and punishes transgression. (6) The law provides for means of atonement and atonement results in (7) maintenance or re-establishment of the covenantal relationship. (8) All those who are maintained in the covenant by obedience, atonement and God’s mercy belong to the group that will be saved. An important interpretation of the first and last points is that election and, ultimately, salvation are considered to be by God’s mercy rather than human achievement.
I should not that this sounds like a works-based salvation in that it claims, according to whoever wrote these two paragraphs to define it, one is brought into the covenant by birth and stays in the covenant through works. This sounds like a spin-off of “Dual Covenant Theology” which suggests that Jewish people—those of actual DNA/blood lineage to Abraham—do not actually need “Jesus” in order to be saved. Even if there is any truth to this idea, it is a dangerous position to take because Scripture is pretty clear that salvation comes through Christ alone.
As far as this nomism, it further indicates that salvation is maintained through obedience to the Law. If you are even vaguely familiar with my work you should know by now that I am adamant that nobody earns or maintains salvation through obedience to the Torah (Law), but rather that obedience is a result of genuine salvation taking place in your life. Scripture seems pretty clear about this. There is Scripture to support that Christ—Yeshua Messiah—lives in and through the Believer and that the Believer is both the Temple of God and the Temple of the Holy Spirit of God. Further, under the parameters of the “new covenant” (Jeremiah 31, Hebrew 8) God places the Torah in the Believer’s mind (new spirit) and writes it on their heart (new heart), making them a new creature in Messiah Yeshua… old things (a life of transgressing Torah) are passed away, and all things become new. If a person is truly submitted to the Father, the Son, and the Spirit to the point where all are alive in them, living in and through them, and they have allowed God to place His Torah in their mind and write it on their heart, then there should be a natural response to obey the Torah, not to legalistically earn or maintain salvation, but because they are genuinely saved and have truly submitted to these five things. This, then, will create the person to do the following:
1. They will be hungry for the Torah. Because they have the Father, Son, and Spirit living in them and the Torah placed in their mind and written on their heart, the Torah should consume them and drive them to tear through any Bible they can get their hands on searching for the things they can obey from God’s commandments.
2. When they come across a commandment from the Torah, they will naturally want to obey it because the have the Father, Son, and Spirit living in them and guiding them and because the Torah is in their mind and on their heart—Torah literally becomes a part of their DNA, it becomes who they are. They need it as much as they need air to breath and water to drink.
We are saved from sin (Matthew 1:21). Sin is the transgression of the Law/Torah (1 John 3:4), thus a truly saved person is saved from transgressing Torah, which means that a truly saved person will stop transgressing Torah. Torah obedience is the “proof” of genuine salvation, James 2:21, Abraham was PROVEN righteous through WORKS.
If these things are not happening in your life, then I will conclude that you have likely followed one of the many counterfeit “Jesus”, counterfeit Gospels, and counterfeit Holy Spirits that Paul warned about. (see 2 Corinthians 11:4, Galatians 1:8)
Not of what I just shared her is legalism because:
1. Nothing I have said presented a scenario where one earns or maintains salvation through obedience to the Torah. Obeying the Torah because you are saved is NOT legalism. (As a side note, it is also not Judaizing to obey Torah and teach others to do the same, Judaizing is based on man-made religious rules, not God’s Laws. Read Matthew 5:17-20, Yeshua says that those who obey Torah and teach others to obey Torah will be called greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven).
2. Nothing I have shared presented a man-made religious rule or law, which is the basis of the second form of legalism. The second type of legalism takes man-made religious rules and laws and elevates them to a status equal to or even greater than the Torah of God.
Because I have not violated these two rules of what defines something as legalism, I have not taught the “extreme legalism” you often accuse me of and I am not “Judaizing” as you also often accuse me of because I have not taught man-made religious rules and laws out of Judaism as being equal to or greater than the Torah that God gave His people.
I also do not know anyone at all in any Messianic circles, Jewish or Christian, Torah-positive Christian groups, or even the “Hebrew Roots Movement” people that teach a view in line with this “Covenantal nomism”. Everyone I know teaches obeying the Torah because we love God—”If you love Me [Jesus speaking], keep My commandments” and “The one who says, ‘I have come to know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (John 14:15, 1 John 2:4)—and that Torah-obedience is the result of salvation, not the means by which anyone earns or maintains it. So, to answer your question, No, I do not defend nomism via “Jewish roots” and I do not know anyone within any aspect of Christianity connected with what you are calling “Jewish roots” who does. Maybe there are some fringe groups out there pushing this nomism view, but it does not appear to be the norm since I hadn’t even heard of it and you know I have been teaching this way for quite a long time.
Varnel Watson
IF your theology comes from Google or Bing…
Tom Steele
Ummmmmm… I was searching for the definition of your word, which you apparently are spelling wrong… not getting my theology from Google or Bing. What is wrong with you? Like, seriously though… where do you even get the idea that I am getting my theology from Google or Bing?
Troy, I try really, really hard to be as respectful as I can with you, but honestly, sometimes I really wonder if you suffer from some type of mental disorder. I’m not saying that to be rude, I really, honestly think that with a lot of the comments you make. I do apologize if that is in any way taken offensively.
Varnel Watson
Another diagnosing specialist Joe Absher
Joe Absher
The law is killer. It kills me. Theres no escape. Its like a smart bomb. Finds me every time. So sorry I gotta stay under grace on this one.
Varnel Watson
The law is more than a killer but a destroyer One step out of it and you are dead for eternity
Joe Absher
“Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
– Romans 6:11
Dead dead dead. Rest in peace. Good bye. See ya. Adios. Au revoir.
Tom Steele
Well, Troy, that statement right there is probably what God will repeat back to you if it turns out you are wrong and your pork-eating ways actually are grounds for you to be cast into hell.
Neil Steven Lawrence
If you are a Christian you are, by default, a Jew.
Joe Absher
Hold on a minute. I’ll have to let that one sink in….
Neil Steven Lawrence
Joe Absher yep!
Varnel Watson
I dont know about that Neil Where are you getting that?
Joe Absher
“For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches.
And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.”
– Romans 11:16-18
Does this work? As far as grafted in but we’re not of that nation obviously. And our Zion is Christ and heaven.
Neil Steven Lawrence
Troy Day Which is more real spirit or flash. I believe when we get to heaven we will realize how mistaken we were thinking that the physical is more real than the spiritual. This was the mistake of the Jews to think that their bloodline somehow mattered concerning their own salvation and relationship. The bloodline only really mattered in the bringing of the Messiah. Of course God does honor the Jews, the land of the Jews, the promised land, etc. and all the things he intends to do in proving his glory through them. But as far as their purity of blood that was lost along time ago. As we were “learned“ in seminary – “Israel is a physical example of our spiritual reality.“
Joe Absher: “Grafted in“ is exactly the scripture I was thinking of.
Joe Absher
One verse isn’t going to help in this crowd. What else?
Neil Steven Lawrence
Joe Absher ROM. 2:28-29 “A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.”
Joe Absher
Can you help me understand what the circumcision of the heart is.
A. Cutting away of the flesh. Mortifying the deeds of the flesh and the strength of the flesh.
B. Entering into covenant. The new birth. But a few lines maybe? what do you think about it
Neil Steven Lawrence
Joe Absher all that you just said. A covenant comes from the Hebrew word “beri’th” which means: “to cut” where blood is released. So circumcision involves a concept of cutting we’re blood is released. I kind of think it is related in a strange way to God blessing the offspring as well – The parallel is obvious. In an ancient world covenant it was considered unbreakable. (That is why marriage, as a covenant, is unbreakable and marriage is not a contract).
That is why the Bible says, “God will never leave us nor forsake us.“ We may leave him and break the covenant but he will never leave us because he is a faithful God, a covenant keeping God.
Our hearts are very fickle and deceptive and the Bible warns of this fact. That is why we must circumcise our hearts so we can be receptive to God again and not deceive ourselves.
Varnel Watson
Tom Steele so are you saying not eat pork gets you in heaven?
Tom Steele
Nope, not at all. Muslims don’t eat pork, they are not going to heaven so far as I can tell. I am saying that obedience comes a a result of real salvation, not that obedience leads to salvation. Why do we have to keep going around in this circle? Is this NASCAR or something?
Varnel Watson
Just trying to understand what you are saying. It waint easy
Tom Steele
Not sure what’s difficult about it. Most people don’t seem to have any problem understanding what I say.
Varnel Watson
The law is difficult to understand and even more difficult to keep. Like your cheese burger for example. It waint easy to understand a statement like your words that goes all against the New Testament:
your pork-eating ways actually are grounds for you to be cast into hell.
Tom Steele
Revelation 21:8 says that the abominable are among those who will be cast into the lake of fire. The Bible says eating unclean things, like pork, is an abomination. Also, Isaiah 66:17 says that when Jesus returns He will destroy all idolaters and people who eat unclean things. That should be more than enough to convince anyone who has a serious reverence for God.
Link Hudson
God gave Noah creeping things to eat. Certain foods were to be abominable to Israelites, but God had given Gentiles may other foods to eat already.
Tom Steele
I have done an in depth study on that too. The word used, poorly translated as “creeping things” is “remes”. Dr. John H. Walton has a lengthy description of this in his NIV Application Commentary on Genesis that explains that this was a reference to clean game animals hunted for food. He lists things like deer, antelope, and gazelle among others.
Also, it is clear Noah knew the difference between clean and unclean animals, as he took unclean by a single pair, one male and one female, but clean animals he took by sevens. Had Noah decided to have a hog roast after the flood, he would have killed one of the only two pigs on the planet and we wouldn’t even be discussing if it’s OK to eat bacon today because there would be no pigs to make bacon from.
Varnel Watson
Romans 14:2 One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables.
Tom Steele
Romans 14 is dealing with meat sacrificed to idols, not with the food laws of Leviticus 11.
Varnel Watson
So you dont eat cheese burger at all ?
Tom Steele
Where does the Bible say I can’t eat a cheeseburger?
Varnel Watson
Deuteronomy 14:21 – guess you’ve never been at McDonalds in Jerusalem ?
Link Hudson
McDavid’s?
Varnel Watson
When You Crave a Bacon Cheeseburger in Jerusalem a very non-kosher bacon cheeseburger, IWO is the place to go. Very American style, Big piece of meat cooked exactly to our desires.
Link Hudson
Troy Day I’ve had beef bacon in Indonesia.
Varnel Watson
What does this have to do with anything in OP? 🙂
Link Hudson
Troy Day Jews could eat beef bacon if it were kosher.
Tom Steele
That says you are not to eat a baby goat boiled in it’s mother’s milk. A cheeseburger is made from beef, not goat, and the cheese is melted on top, not used to boil the meat. Also, that commandment is given in other places, tied specifically to the Feasts, not a general commandment, though to be sure I personally would not boil goat meat in goat milk. It is also noted by numerous scholars that this may have referred specifically to an ancient pagan Canaanite practice that was forbidden, but I still as a general rule would not boil goat meat in goat milk. Also, there is a story in Genesis where… I believe it was Abraham, I can check if you need me to… had a meal with both meat and cheese together.
Varnel Watson
Like I said, if you go to McDoanlds in Jerusalem they aint got no cheese burgers You have been sinning eating them 🙂 Do you ever have filet mignon and the porterhouse, sirloin, T-bone? They are not kosher either and your sin eating them
Link Hudson
Chickens don’t nurse their young either. Why do Orthodox Jews allow chicken and egg to be eaten together? There is a law about finding a nest and letting the bird go and eating the eggs rather than both of them.
Varnel Watson
Link domesticated chickens make no nest 🙂 Eat away
Link Hudson
Troy Day if all milk and meat together are forbidden (even poultry and milk), then why not forbidden chicken with eggs?
Varnel Watson
never had no chicken with scrambled eggs. Who does that That’s not just not kosher. That’s plain nasty Link
Tom Steele
Then he took butter and milk and the young ox that he had prepared and set it before them. While he was standing by them under the tree, they ate. ~Genesis 18:8 (TLV)
My bad, it was butter and milk with meat, not cheese and meat… even better to debunk the Jewish Talmudic kashrut law with.
Varnel Watson
yes Tom Genesis clearly BEFORE the law?
Link Hudson
Have you ever cracked an egg in ramen noodles that had some chicken boullion mixed in with the MSG? (You may not know what I am talking about, since most Americans don’t know how to make good ramen noodles.)
I’ve probably had a salted duck egg with something or other around here. They serve it with beef. If milk and poultry is forbidden, why not beef and egg?
There is a chance if you have a cheese burger, the milk is from the mother of the steer that the beef was made from. Probably slim, but still possible. But there is no chance a chicken’s mother made the milk to produce chees if you put cheese on a chicken sandwich.
Varnel Watson
I dont eat ramen noodles never had come to think about it so hard NO on this one And I dont believe they have real meat in them either – more of soy stuff. Link perhaps you need a new maid 🙂
Link Hudson
The maid is off for Rahmadan and my wife has been taking care of stuff before we move, so I had ramen noodles last night. I don’t think the maid has ever made me ramen noodles, but she has for the kids on the occasions when we allowed them to eat it. We occasionally let them eat that stuff.
Varnel Watson
Rahmadan passed like 2 weeks ago?
Link Hudson
Troy Day I thought today is the last day of fasting, and tomorrow is the holiday, but this website says the last day is the 14th. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4369822/ramadan-2018-dates-start-finish/. There may be two schools of thought on when to start the fast here locally. The mosques still go wild at night around here, and they fill the tables up at 5 at McDonald’s to fill up the tables and wait to eat cold fried chicken.
Tom Steele
Well, let’s see, that was Abraham that had that “unkosher” meat and milk meal.
“…because Abraham listened to My voice and kept My charge, My mitzvot, My decrees, and My instructions.” ~Genesis 26:5
Abraham paid his tithe too, you know all the preachers love to be pointing that out.
Varnel Watson
Tom stay on topic – says goat not ox WAYTA? #hello
Tom Steele
Bro, look at the OP… you got off topic way before I even came close to being off topic. Plus, I am sticking to the general topic of “should we keep Torah”.
Neil Steven Lawrence
Have you ever thought about this: “technically, Abraham was not a Jew.“
Tom Steele
Technically, you are correct. He was the father of the Hebrew people, the first Hebrew. The Jews are really but one tribe, the tribe of Judah. So, if we getting into little technicalities… while I fully agree with your comment earlier, I would change it from Jew to Hebrew… If you are a Christian, technically, you are a Hebrew. ???
But you seem to be one of the more sensible people in this group at least.
Neil Steven Lawrence
Tom Steele If I wasn’t sensible then I would have to be crazy…! ?
Abraham was the father of our faith before he became the father of the Jews.
Tom Steele
That’s true… as well as the other tribes too. He is the father of all 12 tribes and the Levites.
Neil Steven Lawrence
Tom Steele yes and because of that and the Messiah he is one of the most blessed men in history. I vote him to be one of the 24 elders around the throne!
Robert Erwine
as someone who is of this back ground and converted to Christianity of the Pentecostal flavor , I find it bizarre when I meet goyum culturally doing the appropriation thing , weirded out slightly more than offended.
Neil Steven Lawrence
Robert Erwine not appropriating a culture, simply stating orthodox doctrine according to the Bible.
Robert Erwine
Depending on who and what is being interpreted is even debated among even the orthodox
Tom Steele
Robert Erwine appropriation would be more in line with “Replacement Theology”, wouldn’t it? Where it is believed that the “New Testament” replaces the “Old Testament”, the Church replaces Israel, and Christians replace the Jews as the “apple of God’s eye”.
I do not see how appropriately acknowledging that Believers of Gentile origin are “grafted into” the cultivated olive tree of Israel and as a result embracing the Hebraic heritage of our fathers in Scripture, from Adam to Paul and everyone in between, is appropriation. Perhaps you can fill us in on that.
When you say “who is of this background”, are you saying that you were raised in a Jewish home? Or what is the background you refer to?
Varnel Watson
appropriation is “Replacement Theology”,
Varnel Watson
technically, Adam was not a Jew
Neil Steven Lawrence
Too far off the radar.
Varnel Watson
Nope not really. First Adam second Adam – do you have to be Jew keeping Jewish law to be a Christian – right on the money if you ask me. Why would it be too far at all?
Neil Steven Lawrence
Troy Day mainly because the issue at hand is what makes somebody qualified to be spiritual and in a relationship with God. Also how important is bloodline, heritage, ethnic identity, – and all the promises related to that. Abraham was the first Jew but he wasn’t actually a Jew – to me that’s what’s unusual when thinking about the above discussion.
Varnel Watson
how did you gather all this from OP when it literally says
You don’t have to be a Jew, a Christian, or even have a Bible in your possession to discover some truths. This is an old proverb from the Cree, one of a number of Native American Civilizations:
“Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realize we cannot eat money.”
If you have been following this ministry, and especially if you have read through the blogs on creation and healthy living, you will know that God’s Word places an obligation on us to maintain the balance of creation and provides for us the details on how we are to do that. Get plugged in and be part of this movement to bring the world back to God, both naturally and spiritually.
Neil Steven Lawrence
Troy Day I don’t care about eating or not eating what I care about is making it to heaven and taking as many people as I can with me. A few comments ago the discussion got off of eating and on to what is a true Jew. That is what I am talking about.
Varnel Watson
Well the OP discussion as posted by Tom Steele was about being a true Jew. From what’s written there its about eating. How do you disconnect it from eating in OP and go on?
Tom Steele
Troy Day do you understand the quote that was in the OP? It’s not about eating, it’s about taking care of the planet and ensuring that we don’t destroy all of our natural resources.
Varnel Watson
OK?
Tom Steele
Well, I guess I can understand how you didn’t see that though, seeing as the overwhelming majority of my teachings have to do with taking care of the Earth as well, God’s Creation, but you choose to assume that I am Judaizing and teaching people to be “under the Mosaic Law” when in fact I am teaching about the design of all created things and how God designed life to flourish on this planet. Yeah, believe it or not, that is the foundation to a large portion of the “Judaizing” you and others on here like to accuse me of.
Varnel Watson
You always come back and say that. It just takes you awhile to see my point. I can respect that
Tom Steele
Varnel Watson
the law KILLS Ricky Grimsley funny thing I never seen you post your comment in this discussion before as a reason that hinders revival https://www.facebook.com/groups/pentecostaltheologygroup/permalink/1740942902627384/?comment_id=1742437782477896&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R1%22%7D
Ricky Grimsley
I’m trying to spend less time of Facebook these days because it does zero food and is making me angry. However, people keep tagging me in their “young-earth” nonsense and trying to argue. My mind is settled on that issue. Just like it is with keeping the law. The idea that revival is going to break out because people quit eating pork sounds ludicrous. However, if I ever see someone laying hands on amputees and watching limbs grow back……If he tells me it’s because he he believes in young earth or Torah observance…I will certainly give him a listen. Since I don’t know anyone who can keep the law and the Bible says we never could, and says why put the gentiles under a bondage that the jews couldnt fulfill…. im not buting it yet.
Varnel Watson
the earth is one age only – what’s young old earth its all the same Tom Steele he proposes a very valid question when he asked you this
Are you saying that the major revivals of the past actually started because people started observing a sabbath and quit eating pork, stopped cutting their beards and stuff. I don’t see any evidence of that.
Tom Steele
I answered that on the other post, where it was asked. As far as here… Ricky, so, you base your faith on what you can SEE. You need to SEE a miracle to believe that something is of God? There are a lot of miracles performed by outright false religions you know. I am surprised that you would require someone to pray for such a miracle as a limb growing back and then have someone attribute it to not eating pork or keeping the Sabbath.
Incidentally, however, read Larry Huch’s book The Torah Blessing. In it he directly attributes keeping the Sabbath (sunset Friday to sunset Saturday) as resulting in supernatural miracles in his Church. I know you said he’s a heretic, but you also just said that if someone sees miracles and attributes them the keeping the Torah, you would listen.
Ricky Grimsley
Just cause Larry huch says there were miracles doesn’t mean there were. Bethel church has angel feathers and gold dust coming from the sky but I’m not convinced. I’m not saying the miracles would convince me but that’s what acts was all about. The apostles did signs to approve their ministry….right?
Varnel Watson
What about Rod Parsley? Is he all Torah and all?
Tom Steele
He seems to be. He put out two books very heavily Torah in 2015. After he battle throat cancer things kinda shifted in other directions, but the Torah message still comes up. I’ll post a couple of videos of his teaching on Torah that should answer you questions about him being “all Torah” quite well…
Tom Steele
https://www.facebook.com/TruthIgnited/videos/633716676789769/
Tom Steele
https://www.facebook.com/TruthIgnited/videos/902585099902924/
Varnel Watson
What does seems to be mean? is he or is he not Terry Wiles seems to be too
Tom Steele
Ummmm, you might want to proof read your questions before posting. That sounds more mixed up than Yoda from Star Wars.
Terry Wiles
Ricky Grimsley
Nice
Tom Steele
Punctuation… that would help. This is what I “THINK” you are asking: What does “seems to be” mean? Is he or is he not? Terry Wiles seems to be too.
Notice how punctuation and putting a quote inside of quotation marks… and capitalizing the first word in sentence… makes the whole thing make more sense. So, now that I have hopefully correctly clarified your question…
“Seems to be” means that I don’t live with the man and am not with him 24/7, so I have no clue how deeply or seriously he has taken the very things he has taught. All I can relay is what I know, and based on his teaching, such as the two videos I posted, he “SEEMS TO BE” following or at least promoting the Torah message.
Watch the videos, and tell me if you think Parsley is “all Torah and all” (again, notice how I did that, I quoted you by putting the quote in quotation marks).
Ricky Grimsley
Does rod parsley also believe in dominion theology now?
Tom Steele
That I really don’t know, particularly as he has backed way down from making political statements it seems. He also, for whatever reason, has become a lot more balanced or neutral in his position. About ten years ago if you asked me, I’d say that he “seems to be” Republican, but now I really couldn’t tell you with much certainty what his political views are. Even at that, he has always come across as somewhat neutral, often saying that he “tells the right when they get it right and when they get it wrong, and tells the left when they get it right and when they get it wrong”. His political views have always leaned more strongly on who (which politicians) holds views in line with Scripture. For a long time he pushed that the most important issue is the issue of human life, but perhaps he has not said that as much either because it sound “too Republican” and he maybe has chosen to be more strongly neutral.
I don’t really know where we are at with censorship and the alleged “separation of Church and State”. Perhaps there have been some things from that whole agenda that have him and maybe others taking this more neutral position. But I really don’t know whether or not that has much to do with it.
As far as “Dominion Theology”, I really can’t say, but I don’t sense he exactly would hold that type of view. Certainly as a Christian minister he probably believes, as we all should, that the best thing for our nation would be to have genuine Christian leaders in all political offices. Is that the same as “Dominion Theology”? I’m not so sure it is. “Dominion Theology” appears to be more of a radical takeover mindset where Christians with Type-A personalities take control of the government and try to force the laws of the Bible onto the whole of the people. I don’t think that’s a good idea, because this is still a free nation and freedom of religion is still a major part of our core foundation as a nation. Do I like the idea that that means Muslims should be as free to live in and worship in America equally with Christians or Jews? Not really. But so long as they are not planning to blow up our buildings or anything crazy, I guess I can accept the fact that they have a right to live here and worship their god here. It seems that “Dominion Theology” would want to eliminate that freedom of religion and establish America as a strict Christian nation. That might sound like a good idea, but that would probably cause more problems then it would fix.
Varnel Watson
Tom Steele
Troy Day Well now, looks like you found “proof” that everything I share on this site fits the mold of “Pentecostal Theology”.
Varnel Watson
yap if you wanna identify with them – sure