Jesus not perfect and here's why.
David_jay: Why did Peter tell God he was still obeying kosher laws and had never broken them during the vision at Acts 10:12-14? Was Peter lying? Didn’t Jesus abolish kosher laws too along with the Sabbath? If so, why did Peter tell God he still ate kosher? Around 50 CE Paul writes that Peter was still eating kosher and it was an issue of contention at Galatians 2:11-13. Wouldn’t Peter have already understood that the Mosaic Law was abolished?
It would be simple to deduce that’s why Paul reproved Peter in the matter as he also confronted “Cephas” which is the context of Galatians 2. Perhaps Peters motive was not to cause strife between the Jews and the Gentiles in the church, or Perhaps Peter might not have fully understood there was no further distinction between the Jews and the Gentiles anymore that merited special consideration as inscribed by verse 14. But the WTS bases their assertions on the written words, not their own presumptions. There was still plenty to understand fully from Jesus parables, and God’s Holy Spirit was the one thing they could count on to receive exact knowledge. Even Barnabas became confused.
The point here would be, through Jesus sacrifice, the Gentiles were Given the same opportunity for salvation as the past chosen people (Israelites). Everyone had become equal in the eyes of God. Even though some ancient laws have come to duration by Jesus Sacrifice? There were still others that would continue, thou shall not kill, thou shall not steal, etc.
The perception between languages regardless if Christendom calls the meditator (Messiah) or the Jews referring to him as the “Son of Man” as a regular prophet, it becomes inconsequential sense it all boils down to what GOD instructs man through his holy spirit to do. If God suggested to humanity “this is my son, Whom I have chosen; Listen to him!” Luke 9:35 Then the implication is NOT as a regular prophet, but as the “Son of God”, then it would be correct to apply the Son of Man as well since the redemption would be for humanity, not just the Jews. So, the assertion the WTS erred in its understanding, therefore falls under one’s own interpretation as I cited earlier.
David_Jay: And I would prefer you to not paste and copy from the Watchtower or any JW publication. Why not? The Watchtower Study edition of February 2017 states: “The Governing Body is neither inspired nor infallible. Therefore, it can err in doctrinal matters or in organizational direction.” (“Who Is Leading God’s People Today?” paragraph 12). I would rather not hear an explanation that comes from a group whose leaders “can err in doctrinal matters.”
Understandable, and I will respect your wish here. However, by the implied statement, it would nullify ANY Christian religious Doctrine. The debate would pose a serious question for the Apostles as Witnesses to Jesus Works and resurrection. The Apostles were imperfect (sinner by birth) human beings as we all are today. They too had their sets of infallibilities. The mechanics of that is, God used imperfect men to set the theme and course, his chosen people should take. Nothing supernatural about the actions of the past prophets that weren’t directly inspired by God himself. So, too was it set for Jesus. To appoint imperfect men (Sinner by Birth) to learn, then teach the word of God by example, of being obedient (true) to their commission, thus fulfilling their appointment. Hence the example of Abraham by Paul. Abraham didn’t have Jesus sacrifice to rely on, but had full “faith” in GOD, that, what God had promised, it would be kept. Therefore, Jesus sacrifice, enlightened humanity to have that same “faith” in God, through Christ, that what God has promised, it will be kept. Romans 4:1-8
There are fine examples in scripture of GOD keeping his promise. Certainly, NOT allowing an imperfect (Sinner) man to remove the sins of our forefathers, is a good example of our creator’s intelligence to require an “Adam of Man” Perfect Man (Sinless) The provincial “WORD” to be humanities only means of salvation. Therefore, if humanity wishes to be saved, it would need? The obedience and “Faith in God” and “Christ Sacrifice”. The latter has been completed. Luke 1:1-4
The answer as to why Peter (Cephas) was still eating kosher, why the Jewish Christians were still observing the Law at Acts 21, and why Paul's words in Romans 14 are different about observing holy days than in Galatians is that Jewish Christians of the past observed all the Mosaic Law. They still do to this day.
One thing you seem to make no note of is that we have the history of the original Jewish Christian congregation. From the time of Christianity's beginning until the Romans banned all Jews from Jerusalem in 135 CE (due to the Bar Kochba recolt), Jerusalem had 16 bishops from St. James the Greater to Judah Kyriakos. The high number of bishops came from the Roman slaughter of members of the house of David, as it appears from St. James onward all bishops were relatives of Jesus of Nazareth.
This is why Peter tells God he is still eating kosher even right before before Cornelius, the first Gentile convert to Christianity, is baptized. And if you read Paul's words in Galatians (written to Gentile Christians) though he claims Peter is wrong, he never says that he, Paul, wins the argument. He doesn't. That is why at Acts 21 Paul is made to give a public display that his teachings to the Gentiles do not apply to Jewish Christians. Much later, when Paul writes his letter to the Romans, a church made up of Gentiles and Jews, in chapter 14 Paul grudgingly agrees that some Christians can indeed abstain from eating certain foods (kosher) and observe certain days above other days (Jewish holy days) and should not be judged for doing so.
Not only does this agree with the history we have from the original Jerusalem Church, there are still Jewish Christians today. In the Roman Catholic Church they are called "Hebrew Catholics," and in other denominations they sometimes identify as merely "Jewish." They follow the Law as well as enjoy full membership as Christians in their respective denominations.
Remember Paul was the apostle "to the Gentiles," not to the Jews, yes? The understanding that the Law was removed for Jewish Christians was abandoned by the time Paul wrote Romans, but literalist Christians resurrected it by the 5th century. The problem created the pogroms, the Spanish Inquisition, and eventually led to antisemitism that was the foundation of the Nazi persecution of the Jews. This connection was made in the years following the Shoah by the major denominations of Christendom leading to the historic release of Nostre Aetate by the Catholic Church. You may need to do far more research to catch up with this information you seem to have missed.
I am Jewish, so if in your mind all Christian doctrines are null by my statement, that is your view. Catholicism and Orthodoxy teach that their doctrines are all inspired whether written or transmitted by oral tradition. So if I were going to choose a Christian religion, I would NOT go with one that taught their doctrines were possibly mistaken like the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses says of their teachings.
And Jews don't believe in Original Sin, so your last comments don't mean anything to me.
Christian mythology is inherently fictional as all other ancient mythological expressions by ancient civilizations, including Hebraic.
The stories told of the Jesus god were fictional but nevertheless appealing in intent, the most likely reason Christianity flourished where most other belief system died out over time.
That's the point I have a trouble getting across to people. It often seems when the Hebrew Scriptures are being their most allegorical that people want to treat them as literal. Should the Hebrew text ever hit on any point literal, people want to shoo that away as fictional.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him understand it.
And Jews don't believe in Original Sin, so your last comments don't mean anything to me.
Interesting interpretation of scripture, however, flawed your view is. Fundamentally, Paul was speaking about the Gentiles having equal rights under Christ sacrifice (God’s Law) While I didn’t find it necessary to elaborate with Jewish Ideology, the Jewish nation lost its legitimacy before God? Thus, giving their inheritance to the non-Jew. It wasn’t necessary to touch on scholarly differences. 132 Second Jewish War led by bar Kokhba (through 135)
According to the statement, you rendered, all Christian religions would be false since they all hold the same basic concept for Christ. The WTS is no different unless it comes by personal opinions. Your findings are erred as well. So, If I were to affirm myself to a religion, it would NOT be one held by its partitive, that, the Torah is the only means to God, and its fulfillment, by rejecting the purpose and manner in which Jesus gave his life for as the “Son of God” which is implied in ancient text, regardless of the obscured revisionist views held by Jews. Word definitions have little logistical weight when it comes to honest understanding.
So, your last statement would have a lesser meaning to me. Perhaps, you need further your study in Christianity applied by Jesus. Since you can’t understand the concept of human, fallibility, "Rendered in the context of being an imperfect human" not the written word of God or its means of transmission to his chosen helpers for understanding and teaching, which Jews are included?
2Tim 1:9 (ESV) who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began.
Then, one such simple fallacy for Catholic (Christendom), Jews, Islam, and Orthodox faiths have? Is the shedding of innocent blood, and the acceptance for the killing of a human being in the name of their religious indoctrination, and perception of WAR? Not only do I consider that a huge fallacy and a crime against humanity? (Crime Against God) it’s also administered as a guiltless act upon humanity and affirmed by these cults. Something, that was enacted for the ancients (Israelites) and affirmed by Christ as God’s chosen proclaimer of his father's truth, not as a simple prophet as Judaism and Islam claim him to be by their view. An irrevocable fallacy implemented and justified by modern Jews and Muslims, and echoed by Christendom to hold this truth to be self-evident as the phrase goes, however gravely mistaken.
Matt 19:18 He said to him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness,
However, I leave it with this one last note, on your intellectual endeavor, you speak of doctrinal matters in a literal sense, a realistic minor mistake you began with. Yet, your perception is in the manner one organization applies bible truth in Gods written words, by masking your own fallacies in doctrinal matters and only considering the Book of Moses to be the only source while applying only what is needed with the rest of scripture in order to be perceived as an intellect.
As you stated: I would rather not hear an explanation that comes from a person that “can err in doctrinal matters.”
The Lord said that the Sabbath was made for man, not vice versa, and I think the same is true of the Law. The animal sacrifice represented the sacrifice of the Savior for the remission of sins, but the Law had many great provisions in it for the time. It was compassionate, moral, and stressed honor, hospitality and integrity in a day when there wasn't much of it.
The emblems of the Sacrament, the bread and wine, took the place of animal sacrifice, and despite what the Seventh Day Adventists believe -- namely, that all Sunday worshippers would be judged of God as part of the Antichrist. (In most of these religions there are threats. The JWs will be judged because they worship on Sunday and the Seventh Day Adventists are going to be judged because they aren't Jehovah's Witnesses.)
God gives people things He intends to be for his benefit, and they use it to damn or condemn people who don't agree with them.