SABBATH KEEPING

[Theo102]

apologetics too much of a defense...reactionary and not an exploration?

Yes, quite. Sometimes I call it madness or even possession.

Jonah was not dead but confined...so for me the meter starts at His arrest or even Judas accepting bribe...And no Sunday resurrection as biblical days begin in the morning and thus that Sunday morning nothing but an empty tomb was discovered...He is risen is true...rose the day before...Sabbath...heals it does..

I've got a different take on it, I interpret the prophetic context as supporting the descriptions from the Gnostic texts and the Quran rather than the Christian story.

well to them it’s more of the servant being all of Israel...the people...you know oy vey da suffering...Zionist Jews now actually see themselves as the messiah Himself...

While that would be consistent with Hosea 6:2, the fruit of political Zionism looks more like what you would get from the Synagogue of Satan.

Hmmm but still not sure what’s going on

The phrase "a body hast thou prepared me" from the LXX is a clear doctrinal variation when compared to the MSS. My working theory is that Apollos was the writer of Hebrews, meaning that he was sympathetic to Paul's interpretation of the new covenant.

Here's how Paul represents Isaiah re the covenant:

Romans 11
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this [is] my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Isaiah 59
20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith YHWH.
21 As for me, this [is] my covenant with them, saith YHWH; My spirit that [is] upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith YHWH, from henceforth and for ever.

Isaiah 59 (LXX)
20 And the deliverer shall come for Sion's sake, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.
21 And this shall be my covenant with them, said the Lord; My Spirit which is upon thee, and the words which I have put in thy mouth, shall never fail from thy mouth, nor from the mouth of thy seed, for the Lord has spoken it, henceforth and for ever.

Right but was the connection made sloppily? Apologetically? Not by Him...but later...as with transubstantiation?

The context is from Zechariah and Isaiah, the problem is reconciling the denial from verse 5 with the lack of deceit from Isaiah...

Matthew 26
31 Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.

Zecharaiah 13
4 And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] the prophets shall be ashamed every one of his vision, when he hath prophesied; neither shall they wear a rough garment to deceive:
5 But he shall say, I [am] no prophet, I [am] an husbandman; for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.
6 And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
7 Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith YHWH of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.

Isaiah 53
9 ... neither [was any] deceit in his mouth ...

 

[clefty]

Actually, it is the way that God wants you (and many others) to see it, as being His way.

ok then DO this and live Deut 8:1...and even He affirms it Luke 10:28

Why? This is another story.

No it is the story...go read what I already posted to you...

After all, the ancient Jews/Israelis had to follow the way of God that you describe very well. They were supposed to see themselves as God's chosen people, not God's beloved sons/children; big difference

no they were supposed to be a blessing to the whole world that it might come to worship Him at His House of prayer for ALL nations...as even Isaiah affirms...Is. 66:22-23

Instead they kept the blessing for themselves...until He affirmed it with “the Sabbath is for MAN”...all mankind not just Jews...so they killed Him...and then spread a slanderous false witness that “Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered to us” Acts 6:13-14 and you still believe them that...your “No rules love and Lawless kingdom”

 

[clefty]

Yes, quite. Sometimes I call it madness or even possession.

well intended most of them...

I've got a different take on it, I interpret the prophetic context as supporting the descriptions from the Gnostic texts and the Quran rather than the Christian story.

no need to be so discreet or tribal about it...do share then...

While that would be consistent with Hosea 6:2, the fruit of political Zionism looks more like what you would get from the Synagogue of Satan.

well they are well intended too...lol...something about tikkun olam and tiki torches...

The phrase "a body hast thou prepared me" from the LXX is a clear doctrinal variation when compared to the MSS.

yes...a preparation or foreshadowing?

My working theory is that Apollos was the writer of Hebrews, meaning that he was sympathetic to Paul's interpretation of the new covenant.

you mean by that the Law done away with and the Jews replaced?

Here's how Paul represents Isaiah re the covenant:

Romans 11
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this [is] my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Isaiah 59
20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith YHWH.
21 As for me, this [is] my covenant with them, saith YHWH; My spirit that [is] upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith YHWH, from henceforth and for ever.

Isaiah 59 (LXX)
20 And the deliverer shall come for Sion's sake, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.
21 And this shall be my covenant with them, said the Lord; My Spirit which is upon thee, and the words which I have put in thy mouth, shall never fail from thy mouth, nor from the mouth of thy seed, for the Lord has spoken it, henceforth and for ever.

Yes in Paul’s writing the deliverer comes OUT OF ZION where as the others have it the deliverer comes to/for...

and will turn them away from ungodliness and not unto them that DO TURN as in the not LXX

Sin is being removed by the WORDS now placed in their mouth never to fail

The context is from Zechariah and Isaiah, the problem is reconciling the denial from verse 5 with the lack of deceit from Isaiah...

Matthew 26
31 Then saith Jesus unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad.

Zecharaiah 13
4 And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] the prophets shall be ashamed every one of his vision, when he hath prophesied; neither shall they wear a rough garment to deceive:
5 But he shall say, I [am] no prophet, I [am] an husbandman; for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.
6 And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
7 Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith YHWH of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.

Isaiah 53
9 ... neither [was any] deceit in his mouth ...

There was no deceit in His mouth...His sheep merely saw their Shepherd as to save them from Rome and not their sins...typical Zionist oops...and when they saw their Shepherd submit instead...they were indeed offended...

offended too that His was not just their shepherd sent to restore the glory of temporal blood Israel but that He came to save ALL...to restore it back to as it was in the OT...both native and foreigner ALIKE...ONE LAW...

the Sabbath of course being made for ALL...even the stranger

 

[Right Divider]

The actual Bible is faced with the synoptic problem.

No, it's not.

If you can't resolve the problem then you have no reason to believe that what is an accurate historical account.

No problem... so ... no problem.

 

[Right Divider]

Neither is what you just posted.

Now you're acting like a five year old.

 

[Theo102]

No, it's not.

Yes it is. The synoptic problem is that the same events are sometimes retold differently in different texts, meaning that there are errors. AFAIK the most profound case is between Acts 22 and Acts 26, which differ on where Paul was supposedly told what his role was. In Acts 22 Paul only says that he was told to go to Damascus for instructions, but in Acts 26 he tells a different story.

 

[Theo102]

Now you're acting like a five year old.

No, you just can't cope with the implications of the term "scripture".

 

[Theo102]

well intended most of them...

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge
Hosea 4:6

no need to be so discreet or tribal about it...do share then...

My position is based on the idea that the testimony of the prophets has more value that general testimony. It's the same reasoning as that for an oath having more weight than an ordinary claim (the Hebrew word שבע can mean an oath or seven, which relates to the sabbath). It follows that endorsement between prophets gives us a framework for interpretation. I'm including Mohammad as a prophet because of Isaiah 29:12, which corresponds with the oral history of Mohammad being given the Quran.

The texts relating to the crucifixion are Psalm 22, Psalm 69, Isaiah 53, Zechariah 13, Daniel 9:24-27, Quran 4:157. The Psalms describe a crucified man with low self esteem, Isaiah and Daniel describe the Messiah being cut off, Zechariah describes the prophets leaving the land, and the Quran describes someone else being crucified.

yes...a preparation or foreshadowing?

Hard to say without resolving the discrepancy between the LXX and the MSS.

you mean by that the Law done away with and the Jews replaced?

Hebrews talks about the role of animal sacrifice for atonement and extends that principle to the crucifixion. Likewise, Paul talks about salvation being based in faith in this idea.

Yes in Paul’s writing the deliverer comes OUT OF ZION where as the others have it the deliverer comes to/for...

and will turn them away from ungodliness and not unto them that DO TURN as in the not LXX

Sin is being removed by the WORDS now placed in their mouth never to fail

Paul started out teaching the gospel of repentance, but later he taught his own one.

There was no deceit in His mouth...His sheep merely saw their Shepherd as to save them from Rome and not their sins...typical Zionist oops...and when they saw their Shepherd submit instead...they were indeed offended...

offended too that His was not just their shepherd sent to restore the glory of temporal blood Israel but that He came to save ALL...to restore it back to as it was in the OT...both native and foreigner ALIKE...ONE LAW...

the Sabbath of course being made for ALL...even the stranger

The sabbath relates to the relationship between the Elohim and their creation, and it's also described as a sign. The Hebrew word for sign is pronounced "oath".

 

[Right Divider]

Yes it is. The synoptic problem is that the same events are sometimes retold differently in different texts, meaning that there are errors. AFAIK the most profound case is between Acts 22 and Acts 26, which differ on where Paul was supposedly told what his role was. In Acts 22 Paul only says that he was told to go to Damascus for instructions, but in Acts 26 he tells a different story.

An event does not need to be described identically every time that it's told, especially when different people are describing it for their own writing. If all of the gospels described the event exactly the same way by different authors, that would be case of possible collusion. They did not collude, but describe it each the own way.

There is nothing wrong with Paul's accounts. Again, not every telling of an event needs to be identical with every other telling even from the same author. If the accounts had conflicting details that would be a different. They do not have conflicting details.

So the problems that you are claiming is not a problems at all.

 

[Lon]

The GoT is the best candidate for the theoretical Q gospel.

Right next to Game of Thrones or something. It is not a best candidate because its questionable to Christendom Got Questions:

Should the Gospel of Thomas be in the Canon?

The early church councils followed something similar to the following principles to determine whether a New Testament book was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit: 1) Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle? 2) Was the book being accepted by the Body of Christ at large? 3) Did the book contain consistency of doctrine and orthodox teaching? 4) Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect a work of the Holy Spirit?

The Gospel of Thomas fails all of these tests. The Gospel of Thomas was not written by Jesus’ disciple Thomas. The early Christian leaders universally recognized the Gospel of Thomas as a forgery. The Gospel of Thomas was rejected by the vast majority of early Christians. The Gospel of Thomas contains many teachings that are in contradiction to the biblical Gospels and the rest of the New Testament. The Gospel of Thomas does not bear the marks of a work of inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Are there any other arguments that preclude the Gospel of Thomas from being included in the Bible? If we examine the 114 sayings in this writing, then we find some that are similar to existing sayings, some that are slightly different, but the majority cannot be found anywhere in the entirety of Scripture itself. Scripture must always confirm itself, and the majority of sayings in the Gospel of Thomas cannot be confirmed anywhere else in Scripture. The Gospel of Thomas is a Gnostic gospel, espousing a Gnostic viewpoint of Christianity. The Gospel of Thomas is simply a heretical forgery, much the same as the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Mary, and the Gospel of Philip.

Thomas Excerpt:

12. The disciples said to Jesus, "We know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader?"

Jesus said to them, "No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being."

Only one without Christ would find these reputable and poor academics will see this as 'proto' rather than "what I remember when I read the bible." It is easily the latter, thus a post, poorly written commentary. It is at best, a C- grade at retention.

Good find...but if they do not listen to Moses and the prophets neither will they be persuaded by One risen from the dead...or by one of the non-canonical writers...

Wow, had no idea 'Other' meant heretic. This is well beyond the pale. You are outside the faith if this is what you believe and read. Sad stuff.

 

[Theo102]

Right next to Game of Thrones or something. It is not a best candidate because its questionable to Christendom

Whether it's questionable to Christendom or not isn't important.

 

[Theo102]

An event does not need to be described identically every time that it's told

Straw man. It's not about being identical, it's about being consistent.

 

[clefty]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge
Hosea 4:6

I was however referring to gospel writers over eager to make sense of an event which happened in the past and close to unbelievable...“mishandling” OT text in over reaching zeal

My position is based on the idea that the testimony of the prophets has more value that general testimony. It's the same reasoning as that for an oath having more weight than an ordinary claim (the Hebrew word שבע can mean an oath or seven, which relates to the sabbath). It follows that endorsement between prophets gives us a framework for interpretation. I'm including Mohammad as a prophet because of Isaiah 29:12, which corresponds with the oral history of Mohammad being given the Quran.

ummm ok

The texts relating to the crucifixion are Psalm 22, Psalm 69, Isaiah 53, Zechariah 13, Daniel 9:24-27, Quran 4:157. The Psalms describe a crucified man with low self esteem, Isaiah and Daniel describe the Messiah being cut off, Zechariah describes the prophets leaving the land, and the Quran describes someone else being crucified.

I was asking about the 3 day Jonah sign

Hard to say without resolving the discrepancy between the LXX and the MSS.

ok

Hebrews talks about the role of animal sacrifice for atonement and extends that principle to the crucifixion. Likewise, Paul talks about salvation being based in faith in this idea.

again Jews reject the notion that human sacrifice atones for sin...something else happened here not related to atonement Per Se as this was a Passover and not atonement...

Paul started out teaching the gospel of repentance, but later he taught his own one.

not sure where you are going with this as I am not sure where your coming from...Paul has been horribly misunderstood despite his vow that he was walking upright and kept the law Acts 21:24

The sabbath relates to the relationship between the Elohim and their creation, and it's also described as a sign. The Hebrew word for sign is pronounced "oath".

How does that relate to what I offered? You speak of the Sabbath as not relevant to you or any of this...I know it is a sign as did Paul...not sure it matters to you

 

[clefty]

Wow, had no idea 'Other' meant heretic. This is well beyond the pale. You are outside the faith if this is what you believe and read. Sad stuff.

LOL...still sooo sore? Hiding cheap shots in posts to others? Attempting to slander with ad Homs? Not answering direct questions with appeals to TOL rules...suddenly rules matter...LOL...the irony...when does any opposing team run to the rules crying “cheater cheater”...

Note my clever advice that the Gospel of Thomas was NOT to be heard by those already rejecting Moses and the prophets...

My “good find” was not to what “I believe“ reading this non canonical text but to another “historical“ reference that Sabbath keeping was a real and relevant thing in the literature of the time...who knows what else is out there as obviously the Sunday winners control the narrative...and still badly enough that the Sabbath truth remains...

So you gonna finally respond to what was actually abolished in Eph 2 you know...the enmity Pharisees had for the curious believers they called “OTHER!” in screeching bleating squealing tones...

You know...NOT the Decalogue with its Sabbath but this:

I am sure with all your years of Greek you can see there was nothing about the Sabbath written here...

However a “sabbatismos” remains for His people Heb 4:9 now that is OTHER...and NOT a Greek word yes?

 

[Right Divider]

Straw man. It's not about being identical, it's about being consistent.

Then describe what you believe is inconsistent.

 

[Theo102]

I was however referring to gospel writers over eager to make sense of an event which happened in the past and close to unbelievable...“mishandling” OT text in over reaching zeal

OK

I was asking about the 3 day Jonah sign

There are three versions of the sign of Jonah, the one about the three days and nights is only one of them.

Matthew 12
38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.
39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
42 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.

Matthew 16
1 The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven.
2 He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red.
3 And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowring. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?
4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

Luke 11
29 And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.
30 For as Jonas was a sign unto the Ninevites, so shall also the Son of man be to this generation.
31 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with the men of this generation, and condemn them: for she came from the utmost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.
32 The men of Nineve shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

again Jews reject the notion that human sacrifice atones for sin...something else happened here not related to atonement Per Se as this was a Passover and not atonement...

Symbolically, the blood wasn't on Jesus.

John 10
7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.

Exodus 12
22 And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip [it] in the blood that [is] in the bason, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that [is] in the bason; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning.

not sure where you are going with this as I am not sure where your coming from...Paul has been horribly misunderstood despite his vow that he was walking upright and kept the law Acts 21:24

Paul didn't make a vow, it related to the four men who were part of Paul's test. Best just to follow the evidence where it leads.

Acts 21
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave [their] heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but [that] thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him,
28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.

Acts 23
6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men [and] brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided.

Acts 26
20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and [then] to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
21 For these causes the Jews caught me in the temple, and went about to kill [me].

How does that relate to what I offered?

Re: "There was no deceit in His mouth...His sheep merely saw their Shepherd as to save them from Rome and not their sins...typical Zionist oops...and when they saw their Shepherd submit instead...they were indeed offended..."

Isaiah 53 starts with a question about the application of power, but it relates to form rather than the political ambition of the Zealots.

You speak of the Sabbath as not relevant to you or any of this...I know it is a sign as did Paul...not sure it matters to you

I don't know why you would arrive at that conclusion. Signs are always relevant.

 

[Theo102]

Then describe what you believe is inconsistent.

Where Paul learned of his role, for starters; on the Road to Damascus per Acts 26 vs the city of Damascus as implied by Acts 9 and 22.

 

[Right Divider]

Where Paul learned of his role, for starters; on the Road to Damascus per Acts 26 vs the city of Damascus as implied by Acts 9 and 22.

Please provide more detail. Actually quote and compare the scripture. I'd still like to see where you think that there is an inconsistency. There isn't.

 

[Right Divider]

Act 9:3 KJV And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:

Act 22:6 KJV And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me.

Act 26:12 KJV Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests,

All three accounts agree that is was ON HIS WAY to Damascus.

 

[clefty]

OK

ok wut? I complimented your find of a non canonical text regarding sabbath keeping and now I have no idea what wut is going on...or ok...you continued with a textual criticism of Luke and Hosea which I thought was about time and then it all went Greek to me...you Greek? Haha...No wait you referenced the Quran

There are three versions of the sign of Jonah, the one about the three days and nights is only one of them.

Matthew 12
38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee.
39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
42 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.

Matthew 16
1 The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven.
2 He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red.
3 And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowring. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?
4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

Luke 11
29 And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.
30 For as Jonas was a sign unto the Ninevites, so shall also the Son of man be to this generation.
31 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with the men of this generation, and condemn them: for she came from the utmost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.
32 The men of Nineve shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.

well technically 2 out of 3 times as the second is again in Matt and He refers to it to the Pharisees He told before or by now should have known as He told them before...

But all this means what?...not the traditional predictions of dead 3 days? Or that Jews were being triggered that even goyim Nineveh repented and they didn’t...

I offered it was not a timing thing as Jonah was not dead 3 days/nights....but was a last hope savior for Nineveh...

Symbolically, the blood wasn't on Jesus.

now what? Please elaborate and stop the initiation into your idea Zen Master...

the Passover lambs blood...or His own?

John 10
7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.

Exodus 12
22 And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip [it] in the blood that [is] in the bason, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that [is] in the bason; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning.

right...blood on the door pleased the Father His wrath now passes all that enter into that door to His kingdom...fire proof and wrath proof...yet nothing about sin being removed or Sabbath

Paul didn't make a vow, it related to the four men who were part of Paul's test. Best just to follow the evidence where it leads.

no best you lead what you wish the reader to understand the evidence to say...

Acts 21
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave [their] heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but [that] thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.

see? Myraids of Jews who believe AND still zealous for the law are now appeased that Paul walkest orderly NOT DEFILING THE TEMPLE BY BRINGING GENTILES or teaching them the laws don’t matter come on in any way your customs does it....

but Paul KEEPEST the Law which includes DONT LIE...“Teaching Torah was destroyed by Jesus Who changed the customs Moses delivered to us” would be a LIE or as Luke wrote in Acts 6:13-14 a false witness to stir up the people...

27 And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him,
28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.

yes the same crap they stirred up against Stephen...Acts 6:13-14

You left out verse 29”...they SUPPOSED Paul had brought (a goyim) into the temple.” A charge he repeatedly denied and they could NOT prove. Acts 23:29, 24:12-13,18-20 25:7-8, 28:17

Acts 23
6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men [and] brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
7 And when he had so said, there arose a dissension between the Pharisees and the Sadducees: and the multitude was divided.

why? because Paul brought a gentile into the temple... a crime punishable by death...or that Paul taught the cross abolished the Law...oh and Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered? That false witness again?

Well if Paul really DID do ANY of that do you really think the Pharisees would have arisen a dissension with the Sadducees even protesting above the bedlam “we find NO EVIL in this man...” verse 9...it got so rowdy in there the Roman commander had to send in the Calvary...LOL

certainly not because of what Christendom and Judaism and Islam think: the false witness that Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered to us...BUT as you underlined above “concerning the hope and RESURRECTION of the DEAD”...

Acts 26
20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and [then] to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
21 For these causes the Jews caught me in the temple, and went about to kill [me].

so which works are those? Hail Marys on a rosary? Love everybody like they like? Give peace a chance? Sunday power hour Ham dinners following? Prayers to Mecca? Incense to Buddha?

John the Baptist thundered the same to the Pharisees “THEREFORE bear fruits worthy of repentance!” Matt 3:8 was John advocating the abolishment of the Sabbath...eat bats cats and wombats? LOL Also in Luke 3:8 if you missed it...Peter preached the same Acts 2:38 repent...remission of sins... Acts 3:19...

But you claim Paul taught otherwise? Acts 26:20 as you underlined has him teach gentiles to repent...later under house arrest he tells visiting Jews...persuading them from the Law of Moses and the Prophets...the very same which had ONE LAW for both Native and Foreigner ALIKE...REMEMBER the Sabbath day?...to give it to the stranger within your gates? How ironic it is the only Law specifically instructed to the goyim alike...ONE Law...

is why Eph 2 one new man from both Jew and goyim...Gal 3 neither Jew or goyim in Yahushua...Col 2 new moon and sabbaths ARE a shadow of good things to come ...even in 2020

most of these letters were written prior Paul’s trials and could have been admitted to prove he was teaching gentiles NOT to turn to Torah but JUST repent...FAITH ALONE...or get MAD and forget about all this as to gentiles...

but as Paul said they could NOT PROVE HE TAUGHT that Jesus had changed the customs Moses delivered us...Certainly NOT!...WE ESTABLISH THE TORAH! he told Romans 3:35

Is why Heb 4:9 a sabbatismos remains for His people...Not just Jews...as it was when the ekklessia was in the wilderness

Luke finishes Acts with Paul quoting Isaiah that the Jews need to TURN and be healed Acts 28:27 turn into what Torahlessness? And Paul asserts the gentiles crowding into synagogues WILL hear it! Verse 28 referencing Isaiah 42:1,6 certainly Is 66:23...as “ALL flesh will worship new moon to new moon Sabbath to Sabbath”...

Re: "There was no deceit in His mouth...His sheep merely saw their Shepherd as to save them from Rome and not their sins...typical Zionist oops...and when they saw their Shepherd submit instead...they were indeed offended..."

Isaiah 53 starts with a question about the application of power, but it relates to form rather than the political ambition of the Zealots.

what’s written is not always applied

Yes but that the disciples wanted the glory restored to Israel even after (especially after) He rose from the dead Acts 1:6 reveals it was political power and not form they were after in the OT...He left them hanging on that...

I don't know why you would arrive at that conclusion.

because you are not conclusive and distract

Signs are always relevant.

so I will take that as a no....

That He is always relevant even Satan believes...but does not obey..Nor follow Him His Way...