PDA

View Full Version : Discussion God And The Jewish Religion??



Pages : [1] 2 3

Firstfruits
Aug 23rd 2008, 05:49 PM
There is absolutely no doubt that God loves Israel, yet according to the following God does not regard the Jews Religion, because it is not according to what he commanded.

Knowing therefore that God does not regard the Jewish Religion, where do we stand if we try to be justified by that which is contained within it?

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

When Jesus came he confirmed the same;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Whose counsel do we follow, is it God or mans?

Firstfruits

BroRog
Aug 23rd 2008, 06:04 PM
God's problem wasn't with the law or the religion. After all, he commanded Israel to practice that religion. God's problem had to do with the hearts of the people, who apparently didn't care much for God.

Firstfruits
Aug 23rd 2008, 06:16 PM
God's problem wasn't with the law or the religion. After all, he commanded Israel to practice that religion. God's problem had to do with the hearts of the people, who apparently didn't care much for God.

Jesus said that the Jewish religion was according to the commandments of men, which is what was being followed; Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

What was being taught was not what God commanded. Jesus also said that by their teaching Gods commands had been made void; Mt 15:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

They had without doubt added to and diminished Gods commandments. They were worshiping God but as Jesus said it was in vain.

Firstfruits

BroRog
Aug 23rd 2008, 06:20 PM
Jesus said that the Jewish religion was according to the commandments of men, which is what was being followed; Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

What was being taught was not what God commanded. Jesus also said that by their teaching Gods commands had been made void; Mt 15:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

They had without doubt added to and diminished Gods commandments. They were worshiping God but as Jesus said it was in vain.

Firstfruits

Yes, I see what you are saying now. I agree.

Firstfruits
Aug 23rd 2008, 06:26 PM
Yes, I see what you are saying now. I agree.

Thank you BroRog,

So Knowing therefore that God does not regard the Jewish Religion because of what they taught, where do we stand if we try to be justified by that which is contained within it?

Firstfruits

BroRog
Aug 23rd 2008, 06:38 PM
Thank you BroRog,

So Knowing therefore that God does not regard the Jewish Religion because of what they taught, where do we stand if we try to be justified by that which is contained within it?

Firstfruits


We stand like Wile E. Coyote in the face of gravity. :) beep beep

Firstfruits
Aug 23rd 2008, 06:46 PM
We stand like Wile E. Coyote in the face of gravity. :) beep beep

Are we therefore also worshiping in vain as in Wile E Coyotes quest for the Road Runner?

Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.


Firstfruits

scourge39
Aug 23rd 2008, 06:56 PM
Jesus was decrying the rabbinical teachings that had been used as a guide to interpret and supplement the OT between the completion of the Hebrew Scriptures and his day. This is why he mentions the 'precepts of men.' He was not in any way downplaying the OT or Judaism in its purest form. The Sermon on the Mount, recorded in Matthew Chapters 5 to 7 is essentially a recapitulation of the giving of the OT Law to Israel by Moses in the book of Deuteronomy. Jesus, as the 'new Moses,' is retreiving the true meaning and application of the OT law that had been lost and undermined by extraneous rabbinical teaching that, while attempting to adhere to it in the strictest literal sense, consequently ignored or lost sight of the spirit behind it.

Firstfruits
Aug 23rd 2008, 07:04 PM
Jesus was decrying the rabbinical teachings that had been used as a guide to interpret and supplement the OT between the completion of the Hebrew Scriptures and his day. This is why he mentions the 'precepts of men.' He was not in any way downplaying the OT or Judaism in its purest form. The Sermon on the Mount, recorded in Matthew Chapters 5 to 7 is essentially a recapitulation of the giving of the OT Law to Israel by Moses in the book of Deuteronomy. Jesus, as the 'new Moses,' is retreiving the true meaning and application of the OT law that had been lost and undermined by extraneous rabbinical teaching that, while attempting to adhere to it in the strictest literal sense, consequently ignored or lost sight of the spirit behind it.

Jesus was confirming what God had already said knowing that as it was when God first said it, the Jewish Religion was still the same.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

When Jesus came he confirmed the same;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Firstfruits

BroRog
Aug 23rd 2008, 07:12 PM
Are we therefore also worshiping in vain as in Wile E Coyotes quest for the Road Runner?

Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.


Firstfruits

I don't know about us, but those whom Jesus mentioned were.

Firstfruits
Aug 23rd 2008, 07:21 PM
I don't know about us, but those whom Jesus mentioned were.

Remember this is in regards to the commandments of men that are taught as though they are Gods commands.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

If we keep those things that are taught in the Jewish religion with what both God and Jesus said, are we not in the same position as they?

Firstfruits

timmyb
Aug 23rd 2008, 09:26 PM
so here's the question... where in our everyday lives are we doing according to tradition instead of the word of God...

the reality is I believe that this can be said of much of the church today... which is sadness

SIG
Aug 23rd 2008, 09:36 PM
This is a "spirit of the Law vs. letter of the Law" issue.

Don't forget that the disciples--and many others--were raised within the Jewish religion, but still were eventually saved.

If we live in the Spirit--which God has graciously suppled to us--we may fulfill the spirit of the Law.

If we believe fulfilling the letter of the Law will provide the Spirit, we are in error.

Firstfruits
Aug 24th 2008, 10:18 AM
so here's the question... where in our everyday lives are we doing according to tradition instead of the word of God...

the reality is I believe that this can be said of much of the church today... which is sadness

Jesus showed them the difference between the commandments of men and the commandments of God and how their teaching, doctrine, precepts, ordinances made what God commanded of none effect. If we therefore teach doctrine which adds or diminshes the commandments of God as he gave it, then yes it is very sad, even though we may claim to be worshiping God.

Mt 15:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

Mt 15:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

Mt 15:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 24th 2008, 10:31 AM
This is a "spirit of the Law vs. letter of the Law" issue.

Don't forget that the disciples--and many others--were raised within the Jewish religion, but still were eventually saved.

If we live in the Spirit--which God has graciously suppled to us--we may fulfill the spirit of the Law.

If we believe fulfilling the letter of the Law will provide the Spirit, we are in error.

According to God and Jesus they were not following the letter of the law as it was given by God; Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men: Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof: Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Whose counsel do we follow if as Jesus said, the Jewish religion is built on the commandments of men and those that follow it are worshiping God in vain?

Firstfruits

timmyb
Aug 24th 2008, 12:13 PM
This is a "spirit of the Law vs. letter of the Law" issue.

Don't forget that the disciples--and many others--were raised within the Jewish religion, but still were eventually saved.

If we live in the Spirit--which God has graciously suppled to us--we may fulfill the spirit of the Law.

If we believe fulfilling the letter of the Law will provide the Spirit, we are in error.

there is also an offense with the law that we also have an issue with.. notice how there sometimes is an emphasis on one particular part of the law and a shunning of another because it makes one uncomfortable... similar to the ones who preach a loving Jesus but ignore the harsh words that he says to the ones who are living on their own efforts

BHS
Aug 24th 2008, 12:13 PM
Whose counsel do we follow if as Jesus said, the Jewish religion is built on the commandments of men and those that follow it are worshiping God in vain?

Firstfruits

You are correct in saying that modern-day Judaism is a Jewish religion built upon the commandments of men. However, this comment is totally irrelevant to those who study the Word of God and seek to love the Lord and keep His commandments.

In my opinion, you have missed the big picture, which is all too common of those who concentrate their studies in the "NT".

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is valuable for teaching the truth, convicting of sin, correcting faults and training in right living; thus anyone who belongs to God may be fully equipped for every good work."

These words are spoken of the "OT" and I do find it valuable ..., convicting ..., correcting ..., training in right living ... and able to fully equip one for service. There is value in the whole counsel of God.

Blessings,
BHS

timmyb
Aug 24th 2008, 12:19 PM
You are correct in saying that modern-day Judaism is a Jewish religion built upon the commandments of men. However, this comment is totally irrelevant to those who study the Word of God and seek to love the Lord and keep His commandments.

In my opinion, you have missed the big picture, which is all too common of those who concentrate their studies in the "NT".

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is valuable for teaching the truth, convicting of sin, correcting faults and training in right living; thus anyone who belongs to God may be fully equipped for every good work."

These words are spoken of the "OT" and I do find it valuable ..., convicting ..., correcting ..., training in right living ... and able to fully equip one for service.

Blessings,
BHS

BHS has hit the nail on the head... if the Jews want to worship the true God, they would follow Jesus and the issue of Israel wouldn't even be an issue... but the reality is that the majority of the nation of Israel still stubbornly stick to their religion which is a symbol of their own efforts to get to God... they still want to find God on their own terms which was the very thing Jesus rebuked them for...

the OT speaks of Jesus and it testifies of him, there is no difference in the God of the OT and the God of the NT he is one and the same... and the OT is just as valuable to the church and to the Christian as the NT... it's the Bible and it testifies of Jesus and to say otherwise is blasphemy.... many times I have had an NT verse properly explained by reading the NT... it's very helpful to have a complete balanced bibilcal and spiritual diet... it's what helps us babes turn into great men of God and his word

Firstfruits
Aug 24th 2008, 02:24 PM
You are correct in saying that modern-day Judaism is a Jewish religion built upon the commandments of men. However, this comment is totally irrelevant to those who study the Word of God and seek to love the Lord and keep His commandments.

In my opinion, you have missed the big picture, which is all too common of those who concentrate their studies in the "NT".

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is valuable for teaching the truth, convicting of sin, correcting faults and training in right living; thus anyone who belongs to God may be fully equipped for every good work."

These words are spoken of the "OT" and I do find it valuable ..., convicting ..., correcting ..., training in right living ... and able to fully equip one for service. There is value in the whole counsel of God.

Blessings,
BHS

Please let me point out that the original scripture is from the OT and that Jesus is confirming that as it was then, it is was the same in his time.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

When Jesus came he confirmed the same;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Firstfruits

timmyb
Aug 24th 2008, 02:33 PM
The reality is that they were in an attitude of just going through the motions... their hearts were dead... they had the right language, the right moves, they had all the right things visible.. but their hearts were dead... kinda like a walking zombie...

Firstfruits
Aug 24th 2008, 03:12 PM
The reality is that they were in an attitude of just going through the motions... their hearts were dead... they had the right language, the right moves, they had all the right things visible.. but their hearts were dead... kinda like a walking zombie...

So if we follow according to the same doctrine/precepts as they, will we end up as Jesus said they would?

Mt 15:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Firstfruits

timmyb
Aug 24th 2008, 04:28 PM
So if we follow according to the same doctrine/precepts as they, will we end up as Jesus said they would?

Mt 15:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus%20king%20lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Firstfruits

correctomundo................

Firstfruits
Aug 24th 2008, 05:16 PM
correctomundo................

How then are we expected to do what is written in the Jewish religion knowing that Jesus said that it is not Gods but the commandments of men?

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Firstfruits

BHS
Aug 24th 2008, 06:42 PM
Please let me point out that the original scripture is from the OT and that Jesus is confirming that as it was then, it is was the same in his time.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

When Jesus came he confirmed the same;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits, I have no qualms with the Scriptures. Isaiah prophesies an exile for Judah and gives them every opportunity to repent. However, within Judah was a remnant.

Isaiah 1:9 9 Except the LORD of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah.

Isaiah 10:20-22 20 Now in that day the remnant of Israel, and those of the house of Jacob who have escaped, will never again rely on the one who struck them, but will truly rely on the LORD, the Holy One of Israel. 21 A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God. 22 For though your people, O Israel, may be like the sand of the sea, Only a remnant within them will return; A destruction is determined, overflowing with righteousness.

My problem is your indictment against all Israel and their "religion", which was given by God. There were still some who sought to love, trust and obey the Lord. As NT Christians like to say, it is a matter of the heart. As it is now, so was it then a matter of the heart. And as Israel corrupted the pure religion of God, so was it done in Jesus day. But Rabbinic Judaism was just getting started during the first century and "Judaism" was not formed into a Jewish religion until long after Jesus spoke these words. We need to be careful that we today do not corrupt what God has established as well.

Blessings.
BHS

Eaglenester
Aug 24th 2008, 06:49 PM
Jesus said that the Jewish religion was according to the commandments of men, which is what was being followed; Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

What was being taught was not what God commanded. Jesus also said that by their teaching Gods commands had been made void; Mt 15:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

They had without doubt added to and diminished Gods commandments. They were worshiping God but as Jesus said it was in vain.

Firstfruits

You can't broad-brush this to apply to the whole jewish system.

timmyb
Aug 24th 2008, 10:38 PM
Firstfruits, I have no qualms with the Scriptures. Isaiah prophesies an exile for Judah and gives them every opportunity to repent. However, within Judah was a remnant.

Isaiah 1:9 9 Except the LORD of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah.

Isaiah 10:20-22 20 Now in that day the remnant of Israel, and those of the house of Jacob who have escaped, will never again rely on the one who struck them, but will truly rely on the LORD, the Holy One of Israel. 21 A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God. 22 For though your people, O Israel, may be like the sand of the sea, Only a remnant within them will return; A destruction is determined, overflowing with righteousness.

My problem is your indictment against all Israel and their "religion", which was given by God. There were still some who sought to love, trust and obey the Lord. As NT Christians like to say, it is a matter of the heart. As it is now, so was it then a matter of the heart. And as Israel corrupted the pure religion of God, so was it done in Jesus day. But Rabbinic Judaism was just getting started during the first century and "Judaism" was not formed into a Jewish religion until long after Jesus spoke these words. We need to be careful that we today do not corrupt what God has established as well.

Blessings.
BHS

I agree... The Jewish religion was given to Moses by God for the Jews to keep for all their days... keeping the Jewish faith doesn't negate a person's belief in Jesus... as a matter of fact I think that observing Jewish feasts is a healthy reminder of what's to come... example.. Non believing Jews celebrate Passover to remind themselves that their Messiah is coming... Believing Jews and Gentiles celebrate Passover to remember Jesus and his crucifixion and it's a reminder that he is coming again... Reading Leviticus and the Torah is a very healthy reminder...

Romans 3:1 says that there is a good thing to be a Jew because to them was given the oracles of God.. so the religion that most people down and insult is an oracle of God that we would by that understand the purposes of God in his redemptive process that he has sovereignly chosen to attach himself to.

The Jewish religion was supposed to be something that affected them at the heart level. But like what Christianity has been to us today it has been a system of outward motions and religious practices... Christians have the same problem that the Pharisees had back then a outward response with a dead heart. Does that mean that the whole system is bad? No, the system is good, it's the heart response... the problem is not in the religion, the problem is with the heart of the one practicing it.

Emanate
Aug 24th 2008, 10:54 PM
I agree... The Jewish religion was given to Moses by God for the Jews to keep for all their days... keeping the Jewish faith doesn't negate a person's belief in Jesus... as a matter of fact I think that observing Jewish feasts is a healthy reminder of what's to come... example.. Non believing Jews celebrate Passover to remind themselves that their Messiah is coming... Believing Jews and Gentiles celebrate Passover to remember Jesus and his crucifixion and it's a reminder that he is coming again... Reading Leviticus and the Torah is a very healthy reminder...

Romans 3:1 says that there is a good thing to be a Jew because to them was given the oracles of God.. so the religion that most people down and insult is an oracle of God that we would by that understand the purposes of God in his redemptive process that he has sovereignly chosen to attach himself to.

The Jewish religion was supposed to be something that affected them at the heart level. But like what Christianity has been to us today it has been a system of outward motions and religious practices... Christians have the same problem that the Pharisees had back then a outward response with a dead heart. Does that mean that the whole system is bad? No, the system is good, it's the heart response... the problem is not in the religion, the problem is with the heart of the one practicing it.

Do not be deceived. Jewish faith is only based loosely on Torah. Judaism has developed theology where the Rabbis and Rabbinic Custom is considered more important than the Written Torah. To the point where a voice from heaven is to be disregarded if it violates Rabbinic authority.

timmyb
Aug 24th 2008, 11:10 PM
Do not be deceived. Jewish faith is only based loosely on Torah. Judaism has developed theology where the Rabbis and Rabbinic Custom is considered more important than the Written Torah. To the point where a voice from heaven is to be disregarded if it violates Rabbinic authority.

i only acknowledge the Judaism found in the scriptures... the one given by God to Moses.... and the reality is that if their hearts were alive in this there would be no debate of this... which is where we need to be careful... the last thing I want to be accused of is to have a name that I'm alive but be dead on the inside...

in other words... I completely agree with you! :D

Eaglenester
Aug 24th 2008, 11:16 PM
Do not be deceived. Jewish faith is only based loosely on Torah. Judaism has developed theology where the Rabbis and Rabbinic Custom is considered more important than the Written Torah. To the point where a voice from heaven is to be disregarded if it violates Rabbinic authority.

Yes and no

There are some who hold to Torah but reject oral law and tradition - but having Torah without Messiah is still a dead end.

Almost as wrong as accepting Messiah and rejecting His Torah.

Letting Messiah keep Torah through us is the way to go.

Emanate
Aug 24th 2008, 11:19 PM
Yes and no

There are some who hold to Torah but reject oral law and tradition - but having Torah without Messiah is still a dead end.

Almost as wrong as accepting Messiah and rejecting His Torah.

Letting Messiah keep Torah through us is the way to go.


Yes, I was referring to Rabbinic Judaism which is usually what people think when they think of Jewish Religion, Faith, or Messianic Judaism. Are there groups apart from Karaite that reject Oral Torah?

SIG
Aug 24th 2008, 11:21 PM
Matthew 15:1 makes it clear that Jesus is speaking to scribes and Pharisees.

He is not applying Isaiah's prophecy to a whole religious system, but to those who had turned it into a burden.

Pulling a verse out of context to try to prove or understand a precept is also an error.

Firstfruits
Aug 25th 2008, 12:30 PM
Firstfruits, I have no qualms with the Scriptures. Isaiah prophesies an exile for Judah and gives them every opportunity to repent. However, within Judah was a remnant.

Isaiah 1:9 9 Except the LORD of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah.

Isaiah 10:20-22 20 Now in that day the remnant of Israel, and those of the house of Jacob who have escaped, will never again rely on the one who struck them, but will truly rely on the LORD, the Holy One of Israel. 21 A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God. 22 For though your people, O Israel, may be like the sand of the sea, Only a remnant within them will return; A destruction is determined, overflowing with righteousness.

My problem is your indictment against all Israel and their "religion", which was given by God. There were still some who sought to love, trust and obey the Lord. As NT Christians like to say, it is a matter of the heart. As it is now, so was it then a matter of the heart. And as Israel corrupted the pure religion of God, so was it done in Jesus day. But Rabbinic Judaism was just getting started during the first century and "Judaism" was not formed into a Jewish religion until long after Jesus spoke these words. We need to be careful that we today do not corrupt what God has established as well.

Blessings.
BHS

God said that they teach precepts as though they were his, Israel fear God according to the commandments of men.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

When Jesus came he confirmed the same;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

So as you can see it is not my indictment but that of God and Jesus.

By following what Both God and Jesus said are precepts, commands, teachings of men, how does that change the outcome?

Mt 15:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 25th 2008, 12:35 PM
Matthew 15:1 makes it clear that Jesus is speaking to scribes and Pharisees.

He is not applying Isaiah's prophecy to a whole religious system, but to those who had turned it into a burden.

Pulling a verse out of context to try to prove or understand a precept is also an error.

May I ask of whom God was speaking in these scriptures?

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

Firstfruits

Eaglenester
Aug 25th 2008, 12:41 PM
God said that they teach precepts as though they were his, Israel fear God according to the commandments of men.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

When Jesus came he confirmed the same;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

So as you can see it is not my indictment but that of God and Jesus.

By following what Both God and Jesus said are precepts, commands, teachings of men, how does that change the outcome?

Mt 15:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Firstfruits

But that does not negate the Scriptural (not taking the man-made teachings) practice of those who followed Torah.

Messiah's statement is THESE people - not an indictment on Scriptural practice of the Hebrew faith.
Messiah followed the Scriptural Hebrew faith

Firstfruits
Aug 25th 2008, 12:44 PM
You can't broad-brush this to apply to the whole jewish system.

As long as Israel are following the teachings of that they were given by the priests and pharisees, according to Jesus they were worshiping God in vain;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Who are "this people" if they are not Israel?

Firstfruits

Eaglenester
Aug 25th 2008, 12:44 PM
May I ask of whom God was speaking in these scriptures?

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

Firstfruits

To some (including present time) religious leaders - but not ALL.

MANY today teach the precepts of man, does that negate ALL christianity?

Eaglenester
Aug 25th 2008, 12:47 PM
As long as Israel are following the teachings of that they were given by the priests and pharisees, according to Jesus they were worshiping God in vain;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Who are "this people" if they are not Israel?

Firstfruits

Not ALL Israel.

If you say YES - then you have to say ALL christianity being taught by men also.

valleybldr
Aug 25th 2008, 12:47 PM
To some (including present time) religious leaders - but not ALL.

MANY today teach the precepts of man, does that negate ALL christianity? Every denomination has it's version of "oral Torah." (extra-biblical laws, traditions, teachings etc.) If someone doubts that go ahead ands put forth a denomination and we can make a list to illustrate the point. todd

Eaglenester
Aug 25th 2008, 12:55 PM
Every denomination has it's version of "oral Torah." (extra-biblical laws, traditions, teachings etc.) If someone doubts that go ahead ands put forth a denomination and we can make a list to illustrate the point. todd

Totally agree - but that does not negate a Scriptural practice of the faith as the oper seems to imply.

Firstfruits
Aug 25th 2008, 12:56 PM
But that does not negate the Scriptural (not taking the man-made teachings) practice of those who followed Torah.

Messiah's statement is THESE people - not an indictment on Scriptural practice of the Hebrew faith.
Messiah followed the Scriptural Hebrew faith

The Torah has 613 commandments, the Torah cannot be added to or taken away from. Heres the problem, the Torah states that all the commandments can be broken inculding the rules for the Sabbath as long as you broke it to save a life. On top of that there is the Oral law which is to explain what you have been told what you can do or not do.

So look at it this way, as long as it can be claimed that whichever of the 613 commandments are broken in order to save a life you are justified in doing so. Now do you agree or disagree with what the Torah states?

Firstfruits

valleybldr
Aug 25th 2008, 01:01 PM
Totally agree - but that does not negate a Scriptural practice of the faith as the oper seems to imply. You have to see if a given (humanly authored) standard reflects the original intent (of the divinely given law) or if it compromises or negates the same. todd

Eaglenester
Aug 25th 2008, 01:02 PM
The Torah has 613 commandments, the Torah cannot be added to or taken away from. Heres the problem, the Torah states that all the commandments can be broken inculding the rules for the Sabbath as long as you broke it to save a life. On top of that there is the Oral law which is to explain what you have been told what you can do or not do.

So look at it this way, as long as it can be claimed that whichever of the 613 commandments are broken in order to save a life you are justified in doing so. Now do you agree or disagree with what the Torah states?

Firstfruits

Well I reject oral law so it has no meaning.

Firstfruits
Aug 25th 2008, 01:22 PM
Well I reject oral law so it has no meaning.

In order to regard the Jewish religion you cannot reject Oral law as it is Oral law that explains how the commandments are to be kept.


(Mishnah (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/mishnah.htm) Shabbat, 7:2)
All of these tasks are prohibited, as well as any task that operates by the same principle or has the same purpose. In addition, the rabbis have prohibited handling any implement that is intended to perform one of the above purposes (for example, a hammer, a pencil or a match) unless the tool is needed for a permitted purpose (using a hammer to crack nuts when nothing else is available) or needs to be moved to do something permitted (moving a pencil that is sitting on a prayer book), or in certain other limited circumstances. Objects that may not be handled on Shabbat are referred to as "muktzeh," which means, "that which is set aside," because you set it aside (and don't use it unnecessarily) on Shabbat.
The rabbis have also prohibited travel, buying and selling, and other weekday tasks that would interfere with the spirit of Shabbat. The use of electricity is prohibited because it serves the same function as fire or some of the other prohibitions, or because it is technically considered to be "fire."
The issue of the use of an automobile on Shabbat, so often argued by non-observant Jews, is not really an issue at all for observant Jews. The automobile is powered by an internal combustion engine, which operates by burning gasoline and oil, a clear violation of the Torah (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/torah.htm) prohibition against kindling a fire. In addition, the movement of the car would constitute transporting an object in the public domain, another violation of a Torah prohibition, and in all likelihood the car would be used to travel a distance greater than that permitted by rabbinical prohibitions. For all these reasons, and many more, the use of an automobile on Shabbat is clearly not permitted. As with almost all of the commandments, all of these Shabbat restrictions can be violated if necessary to save a life.

Firstfruits

Eaglenester
Aug 25th 2008, 01:55 PM
In order to regard the Jewish religion you cannot reject Oral law as it is Oral law that explains how the commandments are to be kept.


(Mishnah (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/mishnah.htm) Shabbat, 7:2)
All of these tasks are prohibited, as well as any task that operates by the same principle or has the same purpose. In addition, the rabbis have prohibited handling any implement that is intended to perform one of the above purposes (for example, a hammer, a pencil or a match) unless the tool is needed for a permitted purpose (using a hammer to crack nuts when nothing else is available) or needs to be moved to do something permitted (moving a pencil that is sitting on a prayer book), or in certain other limited circumstances. Objects that may not be handled on Shabbat are referred to as "muktzeh," which means, "that which is set aside," because you set it aside (and don't use it unnecessarily) on Shabbat.
The rabbis have also prohibited travel, buying and selling, and other weekday tasks that would interfere with the spirit of Shabbat. The use of electricity is prohibited because it serves the same function as fire or some of the other prohibitions, or because it is technically considered to be "fire."
The issue of the use of an automobile on Shabbat, so often argued by non-observant Jews, is not really an issue at all for observant Jews. The automobile is powered by an internal combustion engine, which operates by burning gasoline and oil, a clear violation of the Torah (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/torah.htm) prohibition against kindling a fire. In addition, the movement of the car would constitute transporting an object in the public domain, another violation of a Torah prohibition, and in all likelihood the car would be used to travel a distance greater than that permitted by rabbinical prohibitions. For all these reasons, and many more, the use of an automobile on Shabbat is clearly not permitted. As with almost all of the commandments, all of these Shabbat restrictions can be violated if necessary to save a life.

Firstfruits



YES one CAn reject oral law.

YOU don't make the rules

IPet2_9
Aug 25th 2008, 04:26 PM
If anyone's ever worked for a large company before, they know there are some unspoken laws that aren't even oral.

I, for one, am thankful that God gave us a Book to live by (early man did not have that), but I know that it is not whether a law is written/oral/unspoken that binds us by it, but whether it is God who passed it. If God speaks a law, then it is law. If man speaks a law, then it's just wasted oxygen.

BHS
Aug 25th 2008, 05:08 PM
So as you can see it is not my indictment but that of God and Jesus.

Firstfruits

I think you missed my point.

I said -- "My problem is your indictment against ALL Israel and their "religion", which was given by God. There were still some who sought to love, trust and obey the Lord (Isaiah -- See Scripture in previous post). As NT Christians like to say, it is a matter of the heart. As it is now, so was it then a matter of the heart. And as Israel corrupted the pure religion of God, so was it done in Jesus day. But Rabbinic Judaism was just getting started during the first century and "Judaism" was not formed into a Jewish religion until long after Jesus spoke these words. We need to be careful that we today do not corrupt what God has established as well."

Blessings,
BHS

Emanate
Aug 25th 2008, 06:11 PM
I think you missed my point.

I said -- "My problem is your indictment against ALL Israel and their "religion", which was given by God. There were still some who sought to love, trust and obey the Lord (Isaiah -- See Scripture in previous post). As NT Christians like to say, it is a matter of the heart. As it is now, so was it then a matter of the heart. And as Israel corrupted the pure religion of God, so was it done in Jesus day. But Rabbinic Judaism was just getting started during the first century and "Judaism" was not formed into a Jewish religion until long after Jesus spoke these words. We need to be careful that we today do not corrupt what God has established as well."

Blessings,
BHS

The first century was when Rabbinic Judaism had taken hold, with all of its commandments of men superceding the commandments of life.

jamesand57
Aug 25th 2008, 06:54 PM
The first century was when Rabbinic Judaism had taken hold, with all of its commandments of men superceding the commandments of life.


Rabinnic Judiasm is generally traced to post 70 AD, and evolved following the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple. a Formalism in judiasm in which the majority did not follow by faith can be traced back far beyond the first century. in Fact the prophets often complained of Israel going astray.

The same though can be applied to the Church of the Past and the Church of today, That formalism and legalism takes the place of true faith in many who claim to be christians.

IPet2_9
Aug 25th 2008, 06:58 PM
The first century was when Rabbinic Judaism had taken hold, with all of its commandments of men superceding the commandments of life.

Disagree. I associate Rabbinic Judaism with the Mishnah, which originated a few hundred years before Christ. It was the first century A.D. when the Gemara took hold, which together with the Mishnah form the Talmud. The Mishnah, which only comprises 1/3 of the Talmud, was already around when Jesus preached, and is basically the oral tradition which Jesus denounced. The Gemara, comprising the other 2/3, only made it worse.

Really, though, I trace back the roots of Rabbinic Judaism all the way back to the golden calf, during Moses. Because the root of it has always been the same: people who care for the Jewish culture, traditions, and identity--but not for God.

Emanate
Aug 25th 2008, 07:41 PM
Disagree. I associate Rabbinic Judaism with the Mishnah, which originated a few hundred years before Christ. It was the first century A.D. when the Gemara took hold, which together with the Mishnah form the Talmud. The Mishnah, which only comprises 1/3 of the Talmud, was already around when Jesus preached, and is basically the oral tradition which Jesus denounced. The Gemara, comprising the other 2/3, only made it worse.

Really, though, I trace back the roots of Rabbinic Judaism all the way back to the golden calf, during Moses. Because the root of it has always been the same: people who care for the Jewish culture, traditions, and identity--but not for God.

I would agree with you there. Sadly, that is the problem with Messianic Judaism.

timmyb
Aug 25th 2008, 07:45 PM
The reality is that the Biblical Jewish religion is an oracle of God and it is good for us to study and observe it... it's not a matter of salvation to keep us in good standing with God, it's just a matter of remembering God and his covenant...

To keep it is not to be religious... to be religious all you have to have is one thing, a dead heart... to not be religious all you need is a heart that is alive on the inside... it's that simple

Emanate
Aug 25th 2008, 07:51 PM
The reality is that the Biblical Jewish religion is an oracle of God and it is good for us to study and observe it... it's not a matter of salvation to keep us in good standing with God, it's just a matter of remembering God and his covenant...

To keep it is not to be religious... to be religious all you have to have is one thing, a dead heart... to not be religious all you need is a heart that is alive on the inside... it's that simple


I would agree for the most part, but I would take Biblical Jewish religion and change it to Biblical religion. There is no religion of Judah in the bible.

keck553
Aug 25th 2008, 08:14 PM
I've seen this problem in a lot of Messianic Judaism myself.
An identity crisis.
Traditions.

However, I wouldn't confine this identity issue with Jews. I've seen lots of Americans, Germans, and Italians with the same features. How many golden calves do 'Christians' worship? A quick look at some of the largest ministries in America center around the love of money and other material self-serving devices.
Identity crisis.
Traditions.

Honestly I try my best to look at like this - "what does God say about it in the Bible?" That's really our only source.

A lot of people confuse God's way in the TeNaKh with mainstream Judaism. Much of the 'rabbinic' fence-building and traditions began after the Babylon exile. Many more are added and continuee to this day. The Jews were so chastized by God for being selective with His ordinances they forcused on the minutia of details instead of the relationship.

The Rabbi's continue to be incredibly inventive about circumventing God's rules - almost as innovative as Christians are.

Likewise, I think a lot of peope today confuse God's way in the Apostalic writings with today's mainstream Christianity.

I was reading Deuturonomy 7-11 this weekend and it occured to me that our identity isn't in culture; it's in God. Without a truely established relationship and identitiy in Messiah Yeshua, we turn to idols in an attempt to complete what only He can complete. I don't think there is anything wrong with traditions as long as they are recognized as man-breathed and not God-breathed and people aren't beat over the head to observe them. So God in Deuteronomy 7-11 reminded His chosen who they were and Who would make them successful and prosperous. It seems that it wasn't so much God sent them to Canaan because they were so special, but to eradicate evil. And isn't that what God has us doing now? I don't count myself as being any more special to God as the next fellow, but if He can use me as an instrument in to erradicate evil by living the Gospel of HaMachiach Yeshua, then that is His will and purpose for me.

Emanate
Aug 25th 2008, 08:46 PM
I've seen this problem in a lot of Messianic Judaism myself.
An identity crisis.
Traditions.

However, I wouldn't confine this identity issue with Jews. I've seen lots of Americans, Germans, and Italians with the same features. How many golden calves do 'Christians' worship? A quick look at some of the largest ministries in America center around the love of money and other material self-serving devices.
Identity crisis.
Traditions.

Honestly I try my best to look at like this - "what does God say about it in the Bible?" That's really our only source.

A lot of people confuse God's way in the TeNaKh with mainstream Judaism. Much of the 'rabbinic' fence-building and traditions began after the Babylon exile. Many more are added and continuee to this day. The Jews were so chastized by God for being selective with His ordinances they forcused on the minutia of details instead of the relationship.

The Rabbi's continue to be incredibly inventive about circumventing God's rules - almost as innovative as Christians are.

Likewise, I think a lot of peope today confuse God's way in the Apostalic writings with today's mainstream Christianity.

I was reading Deuturonomy 7-11 this weekend and it occured to me that our identity isn't in culture; it's in God. Without a truely established relationship and identitiy in Messiah Yeshua, we turn to idols in an attempt to complete what only He can complete. I don't think there is anything wrong with traditions as long as they are recognized as man-breathed and not God-breathed and people aren't beat over the head to observe them. So God in Deuteronomy 7-11 reminded His chosen who they were and Who would make them successful and prosperous. It seems that it wasn't so much God sent them to Canaan because they were so special, but to eradicate evil. And isn't that what God has us doing now? I don't count myself as being any more special to God as the next fellow, but if He can use me as an instrument in to erradicate evil by living the Gospel of HaMaschach Yeshua, then that is His will and purpose for me.


That is a very fine point. The arrow points both ways.

timmyb
Aug 25th 2008, 09:02 PM
I would agree for the most part, but I would take Biblical Jewish religion and change it to Biblical religion. There is no religion of Judah in the bible.

you know what i mean lol...

BHS
Aug 25th 2008, 10:33 PM
I would agree that many in messianic judaism are concerned far too much with identity, culture and traditions, though I am not sure any more than many other Christians. However, I disagree that they have left God out of their religious practice and experience. Aside from study, it was one particular messianic's heart for God that drew me into the messianic experience, and I still love learning more and more of the God revealed in the Scripture.

Blessings,
BHS

Emanate
Aug 26th 2008, 02:11 AM
I would agree that many in messianic judaism are concerned far too much with identity, culture and traditions, though I am not sure any more than many other Christians. However, I disagree that they have left God out of their religious practice and experience. Aside from study, it was one particular messianic's heart for God that drew me into the messianic experience, and I still love learning more and more of the God revealed in the Scripture.

Blessings,
BHS


I would second that. It was a very spirit-led messianic a few years back that inroduced me to the freedom in Torah. I am forever thankful.

SIG
Aug 26th 2008, 03:54 AM
May I ask of whom God was speaking in these scriptures?

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

Firstfruits

For the quote from Isaiah: Jerusalem at the time of Isaiah.

For the quote from Proverbs: Anyone who rejects God's wisdom.

Again--To pick and choose verses out of context and try to use them as proof texts is an error.

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 11:28 AM
YES one CAn reject oral law.

YOU don't make the rules

In order to respect Jewish law you have to accept its OralTorah;
Oral Torah: The Talmud

http://www.jewfaq.org/graphics/talmud.gifIn addition to the written scriptures we have an "Oral Torah," a tradition explaining what the above scriptures mean and how to interpret them and apply the Laws. Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day. This tradition was maintained only in oral form until about the 2d century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm), when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah.

If you reject Oral law, is the Jewish religion therefore against what you believe?

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 11:40 AM
I think you missed my point.

I said -- "My problem is your indictment against ALL Israel and their "religion", which was given by God. There were still some who sought to love, trust and obey the Lord (Isaiah -- See Scripture in previous post). As NT Christians like to say, it is a matter of the heart. As it is now, so was it then a matter of the heart. And as Israel corrupted the pure religion of God, so was it done in Jesus day. But Rabbinic Judaism was just getting started during the first century and "Judaism" was not formed into a Jewish religion until long after Jesus spoke these words. We need to be careful that we today do not corrupt what God has established as well."

Blessings,
BHS

Is the following that which stands now and was inplace when Jesus was here?

Oral Torah: The Talmud

http://www.jewfaq.org/graphics/talmud.gifIn addition to the written scriptures we have an "Oral Torah," a tradition explaining what the above scriptures mean and how to interpret them and apply the Laws. Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day. This tradition was maintained only in oral form until about the 2d century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm), when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah.

It states it was there since Moses, and still applies today.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 11:44 AM
The first century was when Rabbinic Judaism had taken hold, with all of its commandments of men superceding the commandments of life.

Accroding to the following it started from the time of Moses.

Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 11:46 AM
Rabinnic Judiasm is generally traced to post 70 AD, and evolved following the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple. a Formalism in judiasm in which the majority did not follow by faith can be traced back far beyond the first century. in Fact the prophets often complained of Israel going astray.

The same though can be applied to the Church of the Past and the Church of today, That formalism and legalism takes the place of true faith in many who claim to be christians.

According to the following it is believed it started since the time of Moses.

Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 12:09 PM
Disagree. I associate Rabbinic Judaism with the Mishnah, which originated a few hundred years before Christ. It was the first century A.D. when the Gemara took hold, which together with the Mishnah form the Talmud. The Mishnah, which only comprises 1/3 of the Talmud, was already around when Jesus preached, and is basically the oral tradition which Jesus denounced. The Gemara, comprising the other 2/3, only made it worse.

Really, though, I trace back the roots of Rabbinic Judaism all the way back to the golden calf, during Moses. Because the root of it has always been the same: people who care for the Jewish culture, traditions, and identity--but not for God.

Agreed, Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 12:14 PM
The reality is that the Biblical Jewish religion is an oracle of God and it is good for us to study and observe it... it's not a matter of salvation to keep us in good standing with God, it's just a matter of remembering God and his covenant...

To keep it is not to be religious... to be religious all you have to have is one thing, a dead heart... to not be religious all you need is a heart that is alive on the inside... it's that simple

Is that not what Jesus was reffering to in the following?

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Firstfruits

BHS
Aug 26th 2008, 12:21 PM
Firstfruits, suffice it to say, I think there are things you do not understand about "oral law". I do not promote the Mishnah or the Talmud, nor modern day Judaism. Still the Bible contains 66 books and this is a "Bible" forum, so let's keep things in perspective. Anytime anyone teaches the commandments of men in place of the commandments of God, that is a mistake. It happens with both the "OT" and "NT", clearly not restricted to instructions of a particular period of time.

It appears that your bias against the instructions of the Lord blinds you to the fact that it was not a "Jewish religion", but a gift of grace given to the Israelites to bless the world with -- a revelation of God, then and in the future with the coming of Jesus, the Messiah.

Blessings,
BHS

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 12:53 PM
Firstfruits, suffice it to say, I think there are things you do not understand about "oral law". I do not promote the Mishnah or the Talmud, nor modern day Judaism. Still the Bible contains 66 books and this is a "Bible" forum, so let's keep things in perspective. Anytime anyone teaches the commandments of men in place of the commandments of God, that is a mistake. It happens with both the "OT" and "NT", clearly not restricted to instructions of a particular period of time.

It appears that your bias against the instructions of the Lord blinds you to the fact that it was not a "Jewish religion", but a gift of grace given to the Israelites to bless the world with -- a revelation of God, then and in the future with the coming of Jesus, the Messiah.

Blessings,
BHS

Oral Torah: The Talmud


http://www.jewfaq.org/graphics/talmud.gifIn addition to the written scriptures we have an "Oral Torah," a tradition explaining what the above scriptures mean and how to interpret them and apply the Laws. Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day. This tradition was maintained only in oral form until about the 2d century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm), when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah. Over the next few centuries, additional commentaries elaborating on the Mishnah were written down in Jerusalem and Babylon. These additional commentaries are known as the Gemara. The Gemara and the Mishnah together are known as the Talmud. This was completed in the 5th century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm)

Is this what you understand concerning the Oral law?

Firstfruits

jamesand57
Aug 26th 2008, 01:15 PM
Oral Torah: The Talmud


http://www.jewfaq.org/graphics/talmud.gifIn addition to the written scriptures we have an "Oral Torah," a tradition explaining what the above scriptures mean and how to interpret them and apply the Laws. Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day. This tradition was maintained only in oral form until about the 2d century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm), when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah. Over the next few centuries, additional commentaries elaborating on the Mishnah were written down in Jerusalem and Babylon. These additional commentaries are known as the Gemara. The Gemara and the Mishnah together are known as the Talmud. This was completed in the 5th century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm)

Is this what you understand concerning the Oral law?

Firstfruits



Which would be what Jesus refered to as the sake of your tradition and the Tradition of the Elders.

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 01:46 PM
Which would be what Jesus refered to as the sake of your tradition and the Tradition of the Elders.

With the understanding that it is the Oral law that explains the the scriptures and how to apply the law, if the Torah needs explanation according to the Oral law can those that follow it worship God without it being in vain?

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Firstfruits

ananias
Aug 26th 2008, 02:39 PM
As long as Israel are following the teachings of that they were given by the priests and pharisees, according to Jesus they were worshiping God in vain;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Who are "this people" if they are not Israel?

Firstfruits

It's like the formal, dead Christians - full of traditions and sacrements and rules and regulations - nullifying the Word and Spirit of God. There is no dfference.

ananias

IPet2_9
Aug 26th 2008, 02:43 PM
Gemara says that Jesus is currently in Hell, boiling in hot excrement.

Setting aside for the moment the hateful, inflammatory nature of that statement, I find it hard to believe that is an "interpretation of Torah". Nowhere in OT does it anywhere remotely allude to anything close to that. Let alone when you consider Jews reject Jesus as Messiah--after all, if Jesus is not the Messiah, then how is it that the OT mentions him? How can a rabbi interpret a Scripture that does not exist?

The pretense that this Oral law is just an interpretation of Scripture is just that--a pretense. And not a very good one.

Emanate
Aug 26th 2008, 03:00 PM
Accroding to the following it started from the time of Moses.

Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day.

Firstfruits


Sure, and Joseph Smith saw an angel.

How would Oral Torah "from Moses" pass in the years that Torah was abandoned? When Josiah was shown the Torah after it was found, who would have known its oral application?

ananias
Aug 26th 2008, 03:14 PM
The reality is that the Biblical Jewish religion is an oracle of God and it is good for us to study and observe it... it's not a matter of salvation to keep us in good standing with God, it's just a matter of remembering God and his covenant...

To keep it is not to be religious... to be religious all you have to have is one thing, a dead heart... to not be religious all you need is a heart that is alive on the inside... it's that simple

There seems to be an over-reaction to a legalistic party among the Messianic Jews. As timmyb says, it's really very simple.

Jesus stated that ALL the Law (Torah) and the prophets hang on the two commandments to love God with all we are and with all we have, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

God knew that it would be impossible for us to do this through our own human effort, and He promised a New Covenant which would put have the effect of writing this Torah on our hearts and putting it in our minds - by the virtue and righteousness of the indwelling Spirit of Christ and of God the Father.

What does it mean to have God's Torah in our hearts and minds? It means we will love God and our neighbor. It's that simple.

Keeping the God-given Biblical Feasts/Festivals because the Holy Spirit of Christ in us has given us a love for them and because we KNOW that they teach us about JESUS, instead of keeping the man-made feasts of Christmas and Easter which we KNOW had a pagan root (in honor of the incarnation of the sun god in the case of Christmas, and in honor of the fertility goddess Ishtar/Easter in the case of Easter), does not mean we have begun to seek salvation through Festivals which God gave us.

But if anyone says that these ceremonial laws MUST be observed, then he/she must also understand that if this is so, then it means that the Old Testament temple system with its sacrifices and offerings for sins must also be reinsituted, because it was also part of the ceremonial Law - and such a thing would surely be an abomination to God.

There is a huge difference between, one one hand, observance of Passover/Tabernacles or Christmas/Easter because we love these festivals (because they remind us of Christ), and, on the other hand, observing them because we believe we MUST observe them and that we are sinning (transgressing Law) of we don't observe them.

Not many Christians who celebrate Passover/Pentecost/Rosh Hashanah/Tabernacles etc do so because they think they should - but because they love these God-given pointers to Christ, and understand how every detail of them teaches us about His salvation! (unlike the man-made feasts of Christmas, Easter "lady-day" etc).

Not everything God gave to the Jews is evil merely because most of them turned it into man-made self-righteous acts of religious piety and turned what God gave into the doctrines of men.

ananias

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 03:26 PM
It's like the formal, dead Christians - full of traditions and sacrements and rules and regulations - nullifying the Word and Spirit of God. There is no dfference.

ananias

With regards to what Jesus said, I agree with you.

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Thanks

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 03:29 PM
Gemara says that Jesus is currently in Hell, boiling in hot excrement.

Setting aside for the moment the hateful, inflammatory nature of that statement, I find it hard to believe that is an "interpretation of Torah". Nowhere in OT does it anywhere remotely allude to anything close to that. Let alone when you consider Jews reject Jesus as Messiah--after all, if Jesus is not the Messiah, then how is it that the OT mentions him? How can a rabbi interpret a Scripture that does not exist?

The pretense that this Oral law is just an interpretation of Scripture is just that--a pretense. And not a very good one.

Yet without the Oral law the Torah cannot be understood as it is the oral law that explains what is written in the scriptures.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 03:32 PM
Sure, and Joseph Smith saw an angel.

How would Oral Torah "from Moses" pass in the years that Torah was abandoned? When Josiah was shown the Torah after it was found, who would have known its oral application?

That is what is believed so either the Jewish religion stands with the Oral law or it falls.

http://www.jewfaq.org/graphics/talmud.gifIn addition to the written scriptures we have an "Oral Torah," a tradition explaining what the above scriptures mean and how to interpret them and apply the Laws. Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day. This tradition was maintained only in oral form until about the 2d century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm), when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah. Over the next few centuries, additional commentaries elaborating on the Mishnah were written down in Jerusalem and Babylon. These additional commentaries are known as the Gemara. The Gemara and the Mishnah together are known as the Talmud. This was completed in the 5th century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm)

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 03:34 PM
The reality is that the Biblical Jewish religion is an oracle of God and it is good for us to study and observe it... it's not a matter of salvation to keep us in good standing with God, it's just a matter of remembering God and his covenant...

To keep it is not to be religious... to be religious all you have to have is one thing, a dead heart... to not be religious all you need is a heart that is alive on the inside... it's that simple

The Jewish religion cannot stand without the oral Torah or else there would be no understanding of what is written.

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 26th 2008, 04:06 PM
The Jewish religion cannot stand without the oral Torah or else there would be no understanding of what is written.

Firstfruits

Hillel was critical of tithing of plants grown only for seeds (Ma'asrot 4:5-6). Jesus affirmed it in Matthew 23:23

Hillel taught that healing by faith was allowable on the Sabbath (Tosefta Shabat 7:14). Obviously we don't need to refer to the Gospel verses for what Jesus taught.

Hillel reached out to sinners and taught them (Avot D'Rebbe Natan 3:1) Ditto for Jesus

Hillel taught it was allowable to handle an item on Sabbath for which there was no need (Betzah 26B) - Jesus taught that in John chap 5.

Is this the oral Torah you speak of?

Emanate
Aug 26th 2008, 05:13 PM
Hillel was critical of tithing of plants grown only for seeds (Ma'asrot 4:5-6). Jesus affirmed it in Matthew 23:23

Hillel taught that healing by faith was allowable on the Sabbath (Tosefta Shabat 7:14). Obviously we don't need to refer to the Gospel verses for what Jesus taught.

Hillel reached out to sinners and taught them (Avot D'Rebbe Natan 3:1) Ditto for Jesus

Hillel taught it was allowable to handle an item on Sabbath for which there was no need (Betzah 26B) - Jesus taught that in John chap 5.

Is this the oral Torah you speak of?

Hillel also taught that Marriage was permissible if your wife burned your dinner. Y'shua reflected the teaching of Shammai on this topic.

timmyb
Aug 26th 2008, 05:57 PM
I will be the first to say I don't keep the whole Torah, oral or written but, I will also be the first to say that the parts of the Torah that reflect Jesus both oral and written are to be studied and is even healthy to even observe and experience them...

To go over the meaningless parts of the Talmud is neither profitable nor beneficial to the Christian and only damages a Christian's relationship with an otherwise beautiful culture... the principle is to eat the meat and spit out the bones

keck553
Aug 26th 2008, 06:01 PM
Hillel also taught that Marriage was permissible if your wife burned your dinner. Y'shua reflected the teaching of Shammai on this topic.

Yes He did, and Yeshua corrected both Hillel's teachings and Shammai's teaching on the subject.

keck553
Aug 26th 2008, 06:03 PM
.. the principle is to eat the meat and spit out the bones


Awseome! I love that. Can I use it?

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 07:03 PM
Hillel was critical of tithing of plants grown only for seeds (Ma'asrot 4:5-6). Jesus affirmed it in Matthew 23:23

Hillel taught that healing by faith was allowable on the Sabbath (Tosefta Shabat 7:14). Obviously we don't need to refer to the Gospel verses for what Jesus taught.

Hillel reached out to sinners and taught them (Avot D'Rebbe Natan 3:1) Ditto for Jesus

Hillel taught it was allowable to handle an item on Sabbath for which there was no need (Betzah 26B) - Jesus taught that in John chap 5.

Is this the oral Torah you speak of?

The Oral Torah is that which explains the scriptures and how the commandments must be kept.

Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day. This tradition was maintained only in oral form until about the 2d century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm), when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah. Over the next few centuries, additional commentaries elaborating on the Mishnah were written down in Jerusalem and Babylon. These additional commentaries are known as the Gemara. The Gemara and the Mishnah together are known as the Talmud. This was completed in the 5th century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm)

Jesus spoke of those that follow the Jewish religion by doing those things that God did not command, and are taught as though they are from God.

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 26th 2008, 07:09 PM
Even worse, they thought they had the authority from God to actually change Torah (similar to the RCC assertions in the 3rd century). Personally the Talmud is interesting to me, but unprofitable, even blasphemous in parts when stood up against God's Word.

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 07:12 PM
I will be the first to say I don't keep the whole Torah, oral or written but, I will also be the first to say that the parts of the Torah that reflect Jesus both oral and written are to be studied and is even healthy to even observe and experience them...

To go over the meaningless parts of the Talmud is neither profitable nor beneficial to the Christian and only damages a Christian's relationship with an otherwise beautiful culture... the principle is to eat the meat and spit out the bones

The Torah states that you cannot add to the Torah nor can you take anything away, so therefore there is nothing meaningless in the Torah if it is to be followed. It is either all of the Torah or none of the Torah. You cannot take what you want and leave what you do not like or else you are not being obedient to the Torah.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 07:21 PM
Even worse, they thought they had the authority from God to actually change Torah (similar to the RCC assertions in the 3rd century). Personally the Talmud is interesting to me, but unprofitable, even blasphemous in parts when stood up against God's Word.

God said that his people fear him not according to his commandments but according to what men have commanded, as far as God is concerned his command are made void.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

That is still true today not only in the Jewish religion but in many of our churches today.

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 26th 2008, 07:24 PM
....as far as God is concerned his command are made void.


Firstfruits

I followed you OK up to this point. Can you expand on this please?

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 07:31 PM
Awseome! I love that. Can I use it?

That does not apply to the Torah, as you can neither add to it nor take away from it.

According to the Torah the only reason you can break a commandment is if it is to save a life. It's all or nothing.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 07:39 PM
I followed you OK up to this point. Can you expand on this please?

In context this show the original commandment and also the man made commandment.

King James Version Matthew 15

1 Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,

2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

5 But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

6 And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 26th 2008, 07:44 PM
So you are saying the 5th commandment is still in effect but the man made traditions that effectively voided the 5th commandment is an abomonation?

Firstfruits
Aug 26th 2008, 07:56 PM
So you are saying the 5th commandment is still in effect but the man made traditions that effectively voided the 5th commandment is an abomonation?

Unless God has changed what he has commanded then what ever God has commanded is still in effect.

The question therefore is, has God changed his commandments now that Jesus has come?

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 26th 2008, 08:02 PM
No, of course. God does not change.. And I do rely on His faithfulness for my every breath of life.

But God, in Jesus certainly taught us not to hold the teachings of men above God's commandments.

Judaism to this day remains disobedient to God and God's Torah. I won't comment on mainstream Christianity here.

timmyb
Aug 26th 2008, 08:32 PM
The Torah states that you cannot add to the Torah nor can you take anything away, so therefore there is nothing meaningless in the Torah if it is to be followed. It is either all of the Torah or none of the Torah. You cannot take what you want and leave what you do not like or else you are not being obedient to the Torah.

Firstfruits


sorry, I didn't know I was still under the Torah... I was under the impression that Jesus was the perfect sacrifice and that all foods are permittable... do not call unholy what God has called clean...

Firstfruits, I love you and you have some great things to say, but what you're saying is borderline legalism and not even biblical according to what Jesus established in the New Testament... Now I love the Old Testament and meditating on the Torah and even observing some of the feasts to learn more about my Messiah...

You forget the whole of the Law and the Prophets... the Torah and the Tanakh... Love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and Love your neighbor as yourself. Drinks, ordinances, and sabbaths are not commanded in the New Covenant, but the righteous requirement of the law that is justice, mercy, holiness, and to Love the Lord are the only requirements of the law...

timmyb
Aug 26th 2008, 08:40 PM
No, of course. God does not change.. And I do rely on His faithfulness for my every breath of life.

But God, in Jesus certainly taught us not to hold the teachings of men above God's commandments.

Judaism to this day remains disobedient to God and God's Torah. I won't comment on mainstream Christianity here.

I agree with this in the sense that is without the Messiah... Messianic Jews still do these things.... Judaism is an oracle of God concerning a greater thing... it's an oracle of Jesus and I encourage everyone to research it and learn from... but it is by no means a requirement... even Peter was wise enough not to force this kind of load upon the Gentle believers

Sjohn1107
Aug 26th 2008, 10:22 PM
imma tell u like paul told us..if u are trying to get righteousness and justifcation from obeying the law he shall Obey the WHOLE law!And who has obeyed the whole law..NOBODY..Who has been saved by the law?..NOBODY..The law wasnt for us to get saved or to gain righteousness it was given to us so that we could see that apart from god we could not be holy because every single man is sinful..just shows us we need a savior..Who is jesus christ!!!..and by faith in him we are justified and he gives us life..he paid for everybody sins..past present and future..paul says is it by faith you have been saved or by the works?Did u place your trust in the law or jesus?ARe u looking 4 jesus to cleanse u or the law..either or,no in between..but like paul said we still dont just throw away the law because that is what shows the world we need jesus..and if we didnt have the law we wouldnt have known we had sin or we wouldnt have known we needed a savior..like jesus said he did not come to abolish the law but to fufill all of it and not a word of the law will go away..read galatians and ephesians it explains and tells CLEARLY what the law did and what the law doesnt do...

ConqueredbyLove
Aug 26th 2008, 11:17 PM
This is a "spirit of the Law vs. letter of the Law" issue.

Don't forget that the disciples--and many others--were raised within the Jewish religion, but still were eventually saved.

If we live in the Spirit--which God has graciously suppled to us--we may fulfill the spirit of the Law.

If we believe fulfilling the letter of the Law will provide the Spirit, we are in error.

I concur. And also with TimmyB.

It is a heart issue. And, sadly, it is a heart issue in much of the church today, as the other poster pointed out.

SIG
Aug 26th 2008, 11:48 PM
Unless God has changed what he has commanded then what ever God has commanded is still in effect.

The question therefore is, has God changed his commandments now that Jesus has come?

Firstfruits

The Spirit of the commandments has not changed, but our understanding and practice of them has. This was made clear in the Sermon on the Mount--and elsewhere.

The righteousness of the saved would exceed that of the Pharisees--and I think we all know why...

BHS
Aug 27th 2008, 12:55 AM
Oral Torah: The Talmud


http://www.jewfaq.org/graphics/talmud.gifIn addition to the written scriptures we have an "Oral Torah," a tradition explaining what the above scriptures mean and how to interpret them and apply the Laws. Orthodox Jews believe G-d (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/g-d.htm) taught the Oral Torah to Moses (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/moses.htm), and he taught it to others, down to the present day. This tradition was maintained only in oral form until about the 2d century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm), when the oral law was compiled and written down in a document called the Mishnah. Over the next few centuries, additional commentaries elaborating on the Mishnah were written down in Jerusalem and Babylon. These additional commentaries are known as the Gemara. The Gemara and the Mishnah together are known as the Talmud. This was completed in the 5th century C.E. (http://www.jewfaq.org/defs/ce.htm)

Is this what you understand concerning the Oral law?

Firstfruits

Somewhat -- The original "oral" given to Moses is difficult to decipher from what has been added, so in my opinion, the best thing is to rely upon only the written as God's Word. The Hebrew scholar who taught me says the "oral law" was kept pure for quite a number of years. The scribes, priests and elders with their amazing middle eastern minds saw to that. What the orthodox Jews believe is not a true criteria for understanding Biblical Judaism or Rabinical Judaism in the 1st century, so to continually bring up the oral traditions they believe, to me, is moot.

Blessings,
BHS

Emanate
Aug 27th 2008, 01:06 AM
sorry, I didn't know I was still under the Torah... I was under the impression that Jesus was the perfect sacrifice and that all foods are permittable... do not call unholy what God has called clean...

Firstfruits, I love you and you have some great things to say, but what you're saying is borderline legalism and not even biblical according to what Jesus established in the New Testament... Now I love the Old Testament and meditating on the Torah and even observing some of the feasts to learn more about my Messiah...

You forget the whole of the Law and the Prophets... the Torah and the Tanakh... Love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and Love your neighbor as yourself. Drinks, ordinances, and sabbaths are not commanded in the New Covenant, but the righteous requirement of the law that is justice, mercy, holiness, and to Love the Lord are the only requirements of the law...


and where are all foods permittable? Before you say the vision of Peter, you might look to see the interpretation of the dream. It was about Gentiles, wasnt it?

Emanate
Aug 27th 2008, 01:08 AM
Somewhat -- The original "oral" given to Moses is difficult to decipher from what has been added, so in my opinion, the best thing is to rely upon only the written as God's Word. The Hebrew scholar who taught me says the "oral law" was kept pure for quite a number of years. The scribes, priests and elders saw to that. What the orthodox Jews believe is not a true criteria for understanding Biblical Judaism or Rabinical Judaism in the 1st century, so to continually bring up the oral traditions they believe, to me, is moot.

Blessings,
BHS


Actually, Rabbinic Judaism of the first century developed in to what we have today.

BHS
Aug 27th 2008, 01:13 AM
With regards to what Jesus said, I agree with you.

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Thanks

Firstfruits

Obviously, Jesus did not say this about all the Jews, since the early church for the first 10 years was comprised of mainly, Jews!

Blessings,
BHS

BHS
Aug 27th 2008, 01:18 AM
Actually, Rabbinic Judaism of the first century developed in to what we have today.

Yes, that is true -- the key word being "developed", but it is not the same. And Messianic Jews do not subscribe to the Rabbinical Judaism of today.

Blessings,
BHS

timmyb
Aug 27th 2008, 02:21 AM
and where are all foods permittable? Before you say the vision of Peter, you might look to see the interpretation of the dream. It was about Gentiles, wasnt it?

and I am a Gentile... to the Jew I become a Jew... and the dream was given to a Jewish man...

IPet2_9
Aug 27th 2008, 02:43 AM
Actually, Rabbinic Judaism of the first century developed in to what we have today. Yes, that is true -- the key word being "developed", but it is not the same.

I agree, too; also, operative word being "developed". I just don't agree that it originated first century. It was long before that. It has been a long, evolutionary process. Since 1st century, we saw Maimonides' halachic teachings and Kabbalah added to Judaism afterward. Halacha rather amazes me--it is the oral law, telling you how to interpret the Talmud oral law, which tells you how to interpret Torah. I suppose later on another rabbinical council will come along telling us how to interpret Halacha, to tell us how to interpret Talmud, to tell us how to interpret Torah....



And Messianic Jews do not subscribe to the Rabbinical Judaism of today.

Depends on the MJC congregation.

SIG
Aug 27th 2008, 03:52 AM
and where are all foods permittable? Before you say the vision of Peter, you might look to see the interpretation of the dream. It was about Gentiles, wasnt it?

How about it was about Gentiles AND food? To fellowship with Gentiles, Peter would be eating with them.

But it's moot: Jesus Himself said that nothing that enters a man's mouth defiles him....

Firstfruits
Aug 27th 2008, 06:59 AM
sorry, I didn't know I was still under the Torah... I was under the impression that Jesus was the perfect sacrifice and that all foods are permittable... do not call unholy what God has called clean...

Firstfruits, I love you and you have some great things to say, but what you're saying is borderline legalism and not even biblical according to what Jesus established in the New Testament... Now I love the Old Testament and meditating on the Torah and even observing some of the feasts to learn more about my Messiah...

You forget the whole of the Law and the Prophets... the Torah and the Tanakh... Love the Lord with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and Love your neighbor as yourself. Drinks, ordinances, and sabbaths are not commanded in the New Covenant, but the righteous requirement of the law that is justice, mercy, holiness, and to Love the Lord are the only requirements of the law...

Since we are not under the Torah why then do we choose to do certain commandments contained therein and those we disagree with we do not?

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 27th 2008, 07:01 AM
and I am a Gentile... to the Jew I become a Jew... and the dream was given to a Jewish man...

If you are in Christ then ye are neither Jew nor Gentile.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 27th 2008, 07:05 AM
imma tell u like paul told us..if u are trying to get righteousness and justifcation from obeying the law he shall Obey the WHOLE law!And who has obeyed the whole law..NOBODY..Who has been saved by the law?..NOBODY..The law wasnt for us to get saved or to gain righteousness it was given to us so that we could see that apart from god we could not be holy because every single man is sinful..just shows us we need a savior..Who is jesus christ!!!..and by faith in him we are justified and he gives us life..he paid for everybody sins..past present and future..paul says is it by faith you have been saved or by the works?Did u place your trust in the law or jesus?ARe u looking 4 jesus to cleanse u or the law..either or,no in between..but like paul said we still dont just throw away the law because that is what shows the world we need jesus..and if we didnt have the law we wouldnt have known we had sin or we wouldnt have known we needed a savior..like jesus said he did not come to abolish the law but to fufill all of it and not a word of the law will go away..read galatians and ephesians it explains and tells CLEARLY what the law did and what the law doesnt do...

So what you are saying is that Gentiles are still aliens and strangers according to what is written in to Torah?

Firstfruits

timmyb
Aug 27th 2008, 12:20 PM
Since we are not under the Torah why then do we choose to do certain commandments contained therein and those we disagree with we do not?

Firstfruits

i choose to study and observe them for the sake of knowing Christ... Nowhere in the Bible does it say that I have to follow anything other than the ones that require righteousness... ordinances, sabbaths, new moons, and foods have been done away with, the BIBLE is clear on that...

and the Bible is my scriptural authority

valleybldr
Aug 27th 2008, 12:24 PM
i choose to study and observe them for the sake of knowing Christ... Nowhere in the Bible does it say that I have to follow anything other than the ones that require righteousness... ordinances, sabbaths, new moons, and foods have been done away with, the BIBLE is clear on that...

and the Bible is my scriptural authority Yea right. The word "clear" was a dead giveaway and the "the BIBLE is my scriptural authority" line is standard icing on the "traditions of men" cake. todd

Emanate
Aug 27th 2008, 12:24 PM
Yes, that is true -- the key word being "developed", but it is not the same. And Messianic Jews do not subscribe to the Rabbinical Judaism of today.

Blessings,
BHS

The shank bone on the Passover table. Or even the Afikomen. These are just two examples of how Messianics do subscribe to today's Rabbinic Judaism. The tallit is another example. None of these things were in Judaism in the first century.

keck553
Aug 27th 2008, 01:54 PM
I agree with this in the sense that is without the Messiah... Messianic Jews still do these things.... Judaism is an oracle of God concerning a greater thing... it's an oracle of Jesus and I encourage everyone to research it and learn from... but it is by no means a requirement... even Peter was wise enough not to force this kind of load upon the Gentle believers

Peter? What are referring to? The Jerusalem council?

IPet2_9
Aug 27th 2008, 01:54 PM
i choose to study and observe them for the sake of knowing Christ... Nowhere in the Bible does it say that I have to follow anything other than the ones that require righteousness... ordinances, sabbaths, new moons, and foods have been done away with, the BIBLE is clear on that...

and the Bible is my scriptural authority
Yea right. The word "clear" was a dead giveaway and the "the BIBLE is my scriptural authority" line is standard icing on the "traditions of men" cake. todd

I thought tb was being reasonable. The Bible IS clear that sabbaths, holidays, & foods are a matter of freedom in Christ. What is not clear, however, is how to handle apparent contradictions in the Law between the OT and NT. And not just for those things: you've got the matter of Jews vs. Christians, dispensations (if they even exist), sacrifices, eye-for-eye vs. turn-other-cheek, any number of things. How many Christians do you know really have that nailed down?

keck553
Aug 27th 2008, 01:57 PM
How about it was about Gentiles AND food? To fellowship with Gentiles, Peter would be eating with them.

But it's moot: Jesus Himself said that nothing that enters a man's mouth defiles him....

You're using this Scripture out of context.

"You strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel." - Jesus

Why is Jesus using 'unclean' food as an example here?

Firstfruits
Aug 27th 2008, 02:23 PM
Please note that Jesus spoke of those that followed those things that God did not teach;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

The same would therefore apply to the Gospel of Christ and those that teach contrary to what was given.

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 27th 2008, 04:11 PM
This is pretty basic. Jesus = God and They are ONE. Agree? How can Jesus teach contrary to the Father?

Luk 1:5 In the days of Herod, King of Y'hudah, there was a cohen named Z'kharyah who belonged to the Aviyah division. His wife was a descendant of Aharon, and her name was Elisheva.
Luk 1:6 Both of them were righteous before God, observing all the mitzvot and ordinances of Adonai blamelessly.

Why was Zacharias righteous in God's eyes? Was his observance of Torah in vain?

Firstfruits
Aug 27th 2008, 07:01 PM
This is pretty basic. Jesus = God and They are ONE. Agree? How can Jesus teach contrary to the Father?

Luk 1:5 In the days of Herod, King of Y'hudah, there was a cohen named Z'kharyah who belonged to the Aviyah division. His wife was a descendant of Aharon, and her name was Elisheva.
Luk 1:6 Both of them were righteous before God, observing all the mitzvot and ordinances of Adonai blamelessly.

Why was Zacharias righteous in God's eyes? Was his observance of Torah in vain?

Jesus spoke and taught only that which was given him by the Father, so he could never contradict him. Jesus was confirming what God had said that those that were his people were following commandments that God had not given them but they were teaching as though they were Gods commandments.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 27th 2008, 07:33 PM
Although the Jewish religion contains judgments, as Jesus pointed out by changing what had been commanded and applying their own teaching it cancels out Gods law as in the following.

Mt 15:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
Mt 15:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
Mt 15:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

Deut 7:11 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=5&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=11) Thou shalt therefore keep the commandments, and the statutes, and the judgments, which I command thee this day, to do them. Deut 7:12 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=5&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=12) Wherefore it shall come to pass, if ye hearken to these judgments, and keep, and do them, that the LORD thy God shall keep unto thee the covenant and the mercy which he sware unto thy fathers:

They were teaching the parts of the law that they were happy to do and what they did not like was changed as though it was God that the change was from.

Firstfruits

timmyb
Aug 27th 2008, 11:00 PM
Peter? What are referring to? The Jerusalem council?


the first Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 regarding the issue of circumcision, and Peter was referring to the yoke of ordinances that even he knew that they were unable to bear...

that's what I was referring to

timmyb
Aug 27th 2008, 11:03 PM
Yea right. The word "clear" was a dead giveaway and the "the BIBLE is my scriptural authority" line is standard icing on the "traditions of men" cake. todd

the last time I checked and you can correct me on this, but God is the author of the Bible and to submit to the authority of the scriptures for the issue of doctrine is very good...

now Paul even credits the tradition of the elders in scripture... the issue that Jesus refers to is that when traditions of men replace sound doctrine and become even more regarded than the word of the Lord and become doctrines in themselves.... that's what is worship of the Lord in vain...

It's a good thing to have tradition, but when that tradition is taught as and regarded above scripture, that's when it becomes the problem...

keck553
Aug 27th 2008, 11:04 PM
Jesus spoke and taught only that which was given him by the Father, so he could never contradict him. Jesus was confirming what God had said that those that were his people were following commandments that God had not given them but they were teaching as though they were Gods commandments.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Firstfruits

Apparently we agree on this matter.

timmyb
Aug 27th 2008, 11:04 PM
Apparently we agree on this matter.

as do i.........

keck553
Aug 27th 2008, 11:07 PM
the first Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 regarding the issue of circumcision, and Peter was referring to the yoke of ordinances that even he knew that they were unable to bear...

that's what I was referring to

Ah yes. the Jerusalem council.

The Jerusalem council was called to address a specific issue - that Gentiles were being made to prove themselves through works of the Torah PRIOR to salvation (I can relate - it's similar to my charismatic church experience) (15:1). The Gospel was going out to a very pagan world. These new beleivers were coming directly into faith of Israel though a Jewish Messiah, no longer having to 'come up through the ranks' of Judaism as Gentiles had before (allusion in Mat 20). This was a 'new way' (butting heads with man-made tradition) of doing things, but it was confirmed by God (15:8). However it was difficult for many Jews to accept this "instant acceptance of Gentiles," as these converted pagans knew nothing of Torah and brought a lot of terrible practices with them. Once they accepted Jesus, the Council in fact required these Gentiles to follow certain MINIMAL Torah commands (15:20) in order to fellowship with Jewish (and also other Gentile) beleivers who already knew and kept Torah. The coucil gave these basic Torah commands with the understanding theat they would learn more as they attended the Synagogues (15:21). Peter's comment in verse 10 is pointing out that if God had commanded perfect Torah observance as a prerequisit to faith, then they all were in jepardy, as none of them could keep it perfectly prior to faith.

2Co 3:7 But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was,
2Co 3:8 how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?
2Co 3:9 For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory.
2Co 3:10 For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses it.
2Co 3:11 For if that which fades away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.

Christianity teaches that Paul is saying that now that we can have "faith in Jesus" we're no longer under "the Law," therefore it's done away with. This is a very confusing theology as Christianity itself recognizes that some parts of "the Law" remain. I'll give an example:
What if a man loves and cares for his wife but occasionally goes out for a meaningless sexual fling? Christianity (correctly) says that is adultery. But what if that man says with all sincerity, that his definition of adultery is, "not loving your wife and giving your affections to another." He also insists that is not the case with him as his escapades are pure physical acts, without any "love" or even "lust," and have no effect on his love for his wife.
As another example, what if a man is having an affair, and says "I'm doing it out of love, as all that matters is love, we only have to follow the 'law of love.' I still love my wife. I'm capable of loving more than one person."
How do you show either of these men what God's definition of the sin of adultery is, without turning to the Torah?
You can't.

Here's another one:
Christianity condemns homosexuality. That sin is not mentioned in the 10 Commandments, but elsewhere in "the Law." Perhaps then, homosexuality is still wrong because the New Testament "verifies" it? If specific "New Testament citation" is the criteria to determine what parts of the Law we follow, can you marry your sister? Christianity says that would be sin. Is that mentioned in the New Testament? No. Can you call it sin without saying, "because it's in the Torah?" No. This would apply to other sins not "specifically" mentioned in the "New Testament."
More and more of late, books supporting homosexuality, when discussing "Christian condemnation" are using this argument against Christianity, stating that if we are not under the "old Law" anymore, homosexual relationships, if done "in love," are not sin. It is the Christian position against Torah that has given a foothold to this argument. This was warned about in the book of Jude.
Paul did not change any of these commandments. He himself kept Torah and spoke in favor of it in many places, such as: Acts 16:1-3; 18:18; 20:6,16; 21:17-26; 24:17-18; 25:8; 27:9; 28:17; Romans 3:31; 7:12; 1Cor. 5:6-8; 11:17-34; 16:8.
It is critical to note that Jesus never rebuked the Pharisees for teaching Torah correctly, a good example being Matthew 23:23. Here Jesus says to them, "It's fine if you want to add things to your lives that you feel bring you closer to God." (Tithing on dill and cumin were not required by Torah). But He then says, you should keep what the Torah says is required first, then do these optional things." Jesus did not tell them to stop doing Torah -- He told them to do it right.

SIG
Aug 28th 2008, 04:42 AM
You're using this Scripture out of context.

"You strain out a gnat, but swallow a camel." - Jesus

Why is Jesus using 'unclean' food as an example here?

I think not. Jesus revealed that people are not made righteous from the outside-in (as with kosher law), but from the inside-out (as with receiving a new heart).

Re the gnat/camel: The Pharisees were so concerned with keeping kosher, they strained their water, so as to not eat an unkosher gnat. Jesus is saying that they have an (unkosher) camel inside them (obviously not referring to any actual camel). He uses these analogies elsewhere: outside of the cup clean, whitewashed tombs, etc.

How was I out of context?

Firstfruits
Aug 28th 2008, 06:42 AM
the last time I checked and you can correct me on this, but God is the author of the Bible and to submit to the authority of the scriptures for the issue of doctrine is very good...

now Paul even credits the tradition of the elders in scripture... the issue that Jesus refers to is that when traditions of men replace sound doctrine and become even more regarded than the word of the Lord and become doctrines in themselves.... that's what is worship of the Lord in vain...

It's a good thing to have tradition, but when that tradition is taught as and regarded above scripture, that's when it becomes the problem...

I believe we are in agreement here, but I would like to say that although Paul was above his equals in the traditions of the fathers, Paul was called out in order to preach the Gospel and in turn be prosecuted as he prosecuted those that did not follow the Jewish religion.


Galatians 1:11-15
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.
15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

God bless you,

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 28th 2008, 06:47 AM
Apparently we agree on this matter.

Thanks Keck553,

God bless you,

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 28th 2008, 06:48 AM
as do i.........

Thanks again, Timmyb,

God Bless you,

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 28th 2008, 03:38 PM
How about it was about Gentiles AND food? To fellowship with Gentiles, Peter would be eating with them.

But it's moot: Jesus Himself said that nothing that enters a man's mouth defiles him....

Friend, what Jesus said has nothing to do with eating a ham sandwich. The subject wasn't eating was wasn't considered food by Jesus and all the Jews around Him. What was the subject relating to the verse? ham and oysters? Or was it something else? That's what I mean about context.

Agree?

Firstfruits
Aug 28th 2008, 03:44 PM
How about it was about Gentiles AND food? To fellowship with Gentiles, Peter would be eating with them.

But it's moot: Jesus Himself said that nothing that enters a man's mouth defiles him....

Please do not forget that God and Jesus were speaking about those that were teaching commandments that were not from God.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

When Jesus came he confirmed the same;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 28th 2008, 05:32 PM
One of the doctrines of men was the Pharisee instituted ritual hand cleaning before eating.

This all started kind of strangely. The Pharisees had the idea (I can't remember the source) that all God's chosen in Israel were priests, and as such, they should practice the same cleansing rituals that the Levi did in the Temple. Thus the incident.

It really seems strange to me that they could come up with all these things without embracing the inner cleanliness that is clearly outlined in Torah (heart condition). I'm sure there were many in Israel who's hearts were truely circumsized, but probably were confused between man's ordanances and God's, especially with the religious oppression that was going on. It's not like they had the internet and 24 hour access to 8 translations of bibles to access.

In reality, the Pharisees and Saduccess and thier disciples weren't Torah observant at all, especially in the weightier matters. The clothing of righeousness, mercy and justice are much more glorious (representative of God's righteousness, mercy and justice) than zitzit and gnat straining with gauze. Like Jesus said "you should have practiced the later, without neglecting the former.

Interestingly, with all the access we have today to the Word of God, we still have Pharisees and Saduccees amonst us who certainly capture thier share of disciples. What's our excuse?

IPet2_9
Aug 28th 2008, 05:41 PM
This all started kind of strangely. The Pharisees had the idea (I can't remember the source) that all God's chosen in Israel were priests, and as such,

I don't think that is all that strange, considering that is exactly what we all are under the new covenant:

I Peter 2:9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

Mograce2U
Aug 28th 2008, 06:11 PM
Keck553, #122 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1765996&postcount=122)

How do you show either of these men what God's definition of the sin of adultery is, without turning to the Torah?
You can't.

(Mat 5:27-28 KJV) Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: {28} But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

(Mat 5:32 KJV) But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Here we have both the act and the motive addressed in the NT by Jesus. Neither of those hypotheses you gave allow the man any justification based on these passages - that the law doesn't say what they did was sin. If his motive is lust or his desire is to put away his wife without the reason that Jesus gives, then he is guilty.

Whether a man will argue that his lust is really "love" or any of the rest of it, needn't be "proved" to him in order for him to repent. What is needed is that in light of what Jesus has said - he must admit he is at fault. Taking him to the law so he can argue with it, will only further his sin and his guilt and give him more ammo to justify himself. Rather, we can tell him the story about the woman caught in adultery whom Jesus forgave. Then he will know that the Lord will be merciful to him if he repents and his sin will be forgiven.

Where can you find that remedy spelled out in the law of Moses?

keck553
Aug 28th 2008, 06:24 PM
I don't think that is all that strange, considering that is exactly what we all are under the new covenant:

Of course in these times it's not strange at all.

keck553
Aug 28th 2008, 06:26 PM
Keck553, #122 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1765996&postcount=122)


(Mat 5:27-28 KJV) Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: {28} But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

(Mat 5:32 KJV) But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Here we have both the act and the motive addressed in the NT by Jesus. Neither of those hypotheses you gave allow the man any justification based on these passages - that the law doesn't say what they did was sin. If his motive is lust or his desire is to put away his wife without the reason that Jesus gives, then he is guilty.

Whether a man will argue that his lust is really "love" or any of the rest of it, needn't be "proved" to him in order for him to repent. What is needed is that in light of what Jesus has said - he must admit he is at fault. Taking him to the law so he can argue with it, will only further his sin and his guilt and give him more ammo to justify himself. Rather, we can tell him the story about the woman caught in adultery whom Jesus forgave. Then he will know that the Lord will be merciful to him if he repents and his sin will be forgiven.

Where can you find that remedy spelled out in the law of Moses?

So than someone can marry his sister?

The remedy Jesus proscribed is a perfect application of the intent of Torah, by the way, clearly spelled out. Do you think God would disobey Himself?

Emanate
Aug 28th 2008, 06:32 PM
Keck553, #122 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1765996&postcount=122)


(Mat 5:27-28 KJV) Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: {28} But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

(Mat 5:32 KJV) But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Here we have both the act and the motive addressed in the NT by Jesus. Neither of those hypotheses you gave allow the man any justification based on these passages - that the law doesn't say what they did was sin. If his motive is lust or his desire is to put away his wife without the reason that Jesus gives, then he is guilty.

Whether a man will argue that his lust is really "love" or any of the rest of it, needn't be "proved" to him in order for him to repent. What is needed is that in light of what Jesus has said - he must admit he is at fault. Taking him to the law so he can argue with it, will only further his sin and his guilt and give him more ammo to justify himself. Rather, we can tell him the story about the woman caught in adultery whom Jesus forgave. Then he will know that the Lord will be merciful to him if he repents and his sin will be forgiven.

Where can you find that remedy spelled out in the law of Moses?

That is a nice point you made. People like to point at the law to use to judge others, or even to judge the law itself, and we forget about mercy and forgiveness.

Firstfruits
Aug 28th 2008, 07:08 PM
Keck553, #122 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1765996&postcount=122)


(Mat 5:27-28 KJV) Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: {28} But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

(Mat 5:32 KJV) But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Here we have both the act and the motive addressed in the NT by Jesus. Neither of those hypotheses you gave allow the man any justification based on these passages - that the law doesn't say what they did was sin. If his motive is lust or his desire is to put away his wife without the reason that Jesus gives, then he is guilty.

Whether a man will argue that his lust is really "love" or any of the rest of it, needn't be "proved" to him in order for him to repent. What is needed is that in light of what Jesus has said - he must admit he is at fault. Taking him to the law so he can argue with it, will only further his sin and his guilt and give him more ammo to justify himself. Rather, we can tell him the story about the woman caught in adultery whom Jesus forgave. Then he will know that the Lord will be merciful to him if he repents and his sin will be forgiven.

Where can you find that remedy spelled out in the law of Moses?

In the following Jesus showed the difference between Mans doctrine and Gods doctrine, at the end he said that what God has not planted shall be rooted out, what do we understand by that?

Gods command
Mt 15:4 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=4) For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

Mans command
Mt 15:5 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=5) But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

Mt 15:6 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=6) And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

Mt 15:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 28th 2008, 07:51 PM
Since the ONLY morality that exists comes from God; and according to some, His 'law' through Moses is annulled, where in the New Testament does it say that a man marrying his sister is sin?

Mograce2U
Aug 28th 2008, 07:52 PM
So than someone can marry his sister?

The remedy Jesus proscribed is a perfect application of the intent of Torah, by the way, clearly spelled out. Do you think God would disobey Himself?What pray tell was the purpose of THAT question?

If you want to go back into the law then you will find that stoning was the remedy spelled out there. Was that the remedy Jesus revealed was now possible? There was no atonement for willful sin under the law - death was the answer. Now forgiveness and life is the promise. The intent of the law was to keep sin at bay so the people would not be defiled and turn away from the Lord. It thus contained blessings and curses by which it worked obedience and faith so the people would not lose hope in the promise to come when Messiah arrived. This is the law which the law of liberty has made us free from so that we can be under the law of Christ - where repentance and faith is met with mercy and grace because our sin has been taken away so the penalty of the law can not harm us. Jesus gives us life in exchange for removal of our sin. The law could do neither.

When you come across somebody who wants to marry his sister, tell him about the civil law that forbids it. Or you could mention the genetic problems he will face should they have children. Or you could pick up a stone and throw it at him...

Firstfruits
Aug 28th 2008, 07:57 PM
What pray tell was the purpose of THAT question?

If you want to go back into the law then you will find that stoning was the remedy spelled out there. Was that the remedy Jesus revealed was now possible? There was no atonement for willful sin under the law - death was the answer. Now forgiveness and life is the promise. The intent of the law was to keep sin at bay so the people would not be defiled and turn away from the Lord. It thus contained blessings and curses by which it worked obedience and faith so the people would not lose hope in the promise to come when Messiah arrived. This is the law which the law of liberty has made us free from so that we can be under the law of Christ - where repentance and faith is met with mercy and grace because our sin has been taken away so the penalty of the law can not harm us. Jesus gives us life in exchange for removal of our sin. The law could do neither.

When you come across somebody who wants to marry his sister, tell him about the civil law that forbids it. Or you could mention the genetic problems he will face should they have children. Or you could pick up a stone and throw it at him...

Thank you Mograce2U,

God bless

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 28th 2008, 08:21 PM
What pray tell was the purpose of THAT question?

If you want to go back into the law then you will find that stoning was the remedy spelled out there. Was that the remedy Jesus revealed was now possible? There was no atonement for willful sin under the law - death was the answer. Now forgiveness and life is the promise. The intent of the law was to keep sin at bay so the people would not be defiled and turn away from the Lord. It thus contained blessings and curses by which it worked obedience and faith so the people would not lose hope in the promise to come when Messiah arrived. This is the law which the law of liberty has made us free from so that we can be under the law of Christ - where repentance and faith is met with mercy and grace because our sin has been taken away so the penalty of the law can not harm us. Jesus gives us life in exchange for removal of our sin. The law could do neither.

When you come across somebody who wants to marry his sister, tell him about the civil law that forbids it. Or you could mention the genetic problems he will face should they have children. Or you could pick up a stone and throw it at him...

So are you saying there is no moral issue with siblings being married? Are you serious? Has it ever occurred to you that the One who designed us knows about the genetic issues between siblings and perhaps that's why it's a negative Torah command? That just maybe God cares about us enough to tell us what's good and not good for us? Or do you think He just stuck us here on our own, and powered by our own wisdom?

We don't live in thesitic Israel and therefore obey the laws of our country. Last I heard, it's illegal to stone anyone here.

The curses of negative Torah commands have been nailed to the cross paid for by our Savior, Yeshua. The blessings haven't been nailed to the cross, unless I missed that? The 'law of liberty' freed me from the bondage sin and religious people who stick their rules before God's, or condemn me for obeying God. Now I am free to obey God without condemnation.

BHS
Aug 28th 2008, 10:35 PM
This thread, I think, was originally meant to be an indictment of those who follow the precepts of men, notwithstanding it was a heart issue. Even those who find the law somewhat relevant for today, do not necessarily follow the precepts of men, which has been stated over and over. Discussing matters of the heart would have been more in line with the original OP than to degenerate into another "grace vs. law" thread.

I find it amusing(?) that those who do not study the "law" as somewhat relevant seem to know just how it is to be applied in today's society. What most Christians do not realize or admit is that when they follow the instructions in the "NT" they are also following many of the same instructions of the "OT". God's word is truth (Psalm 119:142, 151) and is established forever. Christian theologians have used various means to try to explain why it is no longer important, but like one poster mentioned there are some definitions of morality that are only found in Leviticus. And the divisions (ceremonial, moral, etc) made for various laws were not made by Moses, or the prophets, or Jesus or the apostles, though some think it makes for a good argument.

So I think those who are so opposed to "law-keeping" should at least give more thought to what the "OT" says about itself, rather than trying to impose their "NT" interpretations, which may not be altogether correct. Studying what conservative "OT" scholars say, such as Christopher J. H. Wright (who is not messianic), yet has great insight into the Word might be helpful to at least have a grasp of the overall mission of God.

Blessings,
BHS

timmyb
Aug 28th 2008, 11:18 PM
This thread, I think, was originally meant to be an indictment of those who follow the precepts of men, notwithstanding it was a heart issue. Even those who find the law somewhat relevant for today, do not necessarily follow the precepts of men, which has been stated over and over. Discussing matters of the heart would have been more in line with the original OP than to degenerate into another "grace vs. law" thread.

I find it amusing(?) that those who do not study the "law" as somewhat relevant seem to know just how it is to be applied in today's society. What most Christians do not realize or admit is that when they follow the instructions in the "NT" they are also following many of the same instructions of the "OT". God's word is truth (Psalm 119:142, 151) and is established forever. Christian theologians have used various means to try to explain why it is no longer important, but like one poster mentioned there are some definitions of morality that are only found in Leviticus. And the divisions (ceremonial, moral, etc) made for various laws were not made by Moses, or the prophets, or Jesus or the apostles, though some think it makes for a good argument.

So I think those who are so opposed to "law-keeping" should at least give more thought to what the "OT" says about itself, rather than trying to impose their "NT" interpretations, which may not be altogether correct. Studying what conservative "OT" scholars say, such as Christopher J. H. Wright (who is not messianic), yet has great insight into the Word might be helpful to at least have a grasp of the overall mission of God.

Blessings,
BHS

you are my hero BHS....

SIG
Aug 29th 2008, 12:12 AM
Friend, what Jesus said has nothing to do with eating a ham sandwich. The subject wasn't eating was wasn't considered food by Jesus and all the Jews around Him. What was the subject relating to the verse? ham and oysters? Or was it something else? That's what I mean about context.

Agree?

OK--What WAS the subject?

timmyb
Aug 29th 2008, 12:21 AM
i don't even know what the original topic of this discussion was...

SIG
Aug 29th 2008, 12:22 AM
Funny--I was just thinking that myself:D

Mograce2U
Aug 29th 2008, 01:54 AM
Keck553, #139 (http://bibleforums.org/showpost.php?p=1767081&postcount=139)
Your example was how people argue about the law in order to escape its requirements, and therefore excuse themselves from keeping its moral requirements. IOW, if one is not lusting but loving then it is OK to cheat on your wife. This is always what occurs when the law is brought against sin. Truth is, the man who cheats on his wife already knows it is wrong, else he would seek his wife's blessing - and expect to get it. Do we really need to review 613 laws to convince a man that he has broken at least one of them?

No we can go right at his own guilt, and then speak to him about repentance and forgiveness. Even the Gentile ignorant of the Jewish law knows his own willful sins from the laws he has established for himself - which he doesn't keep either. Do unto others... is a well known principle and sufficient to point out to a man what he would find wrong if it were done to him.

The real problem is that if they won't hear the words of the One God raised from the dead who is their Judge, they ain't gonna listen to Moses either. Point that out to them and you might get them to listen to Jesus.

timmyb
Aug 29th 2008, 02:08 AM
Funny--I was just thinking that myself:D

oh how i long to meditate on the law...

you know King David was a man after God's own heart, and his delight was meditating on God's word than more than obeying it... it was his meditation on God's law that led to his love for God's law and his love for God's law made him want to keep his ways... this man was more of a Christian before Christ than what most Christians are today years after Christ...

If I ever want to be like any other man besides Jesus, King David would be my pick... so... it's not about looking at the law and defining sin...you miss the point... the law is the reflection of the nature and character of God... if all you see is the law when you read it, you will go mad.... but if you see the law and meditate on the God who made the law and why he made it, your attitude towards the law will drastically change, just like David's...

Firstfruits
Aug 29th 2008, 06:35 AM
There is absolutely no doubt that God loves Israel, yet according to the following God does not regard the Jews Religion, because it is not according to what he commanded.

Knowing therefore that God does not regard the Jewish Religion, where do we stand if we try to be justified by that which is contained within it?

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

When Jesus came he confirmed the same;

Mt 15:8 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=8) This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Mt 15:9 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=9) But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Whose counsel do we follow, is it God or mans?

BHS
Aug 29th 2008, 11:54 AM
There is absolutely no doubt that God loves Israel, yet according to the following God does not regard the Jews Religion, because it is not according to what he commanded.

Knowing therefore that God does not regard the Jewish Religion, where do we stand if we try to be justified by that which is contained within it?

True, I am sure that God does not approve of the rabbinical additions to His original instructions. Who but those in modern day Judaism tries to follow them? And who but those in modern day Judaism tries to be justified by them? So for those on this board any other application is a matter of the heart and God can only be the judge of that.

Blessings,
BHS

Firstfruits
Aug 29th 2008, 12:04 PM
True, I am sure that God does not approve of the rabbinical additions to His original instructions. Who but those in modern day Judaism tries to follow them? And who but those in modern day Judaism tries to be justified by them? So for those on this board any other application is a matter of the heart and God can only be the judge of that.

Blessings,
BHS

Thank you BHS,

Because what is written in the Jewish religion cannot be added to or taken away from, is it possibble for those that try to follow what is written to tell what God commanded and what man has added, because if what is being followed has been changed, will they face the same fate as those that teach contrary to Gods commands?

Mt 15:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Lk 6:39 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=6&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=39) And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?

Firstfruits

BHS
Aug 29th 2008, 12:45 PM
Thank you BHS,

Because what is written in the Jewish religion cannot be added to or taken away from, is it possibble for those that try to follow what is written to tell what God commanded and what man has added, because if what is being followed has been changed, will they face the same fate as those that teach contrary to Gods commands?

Mt 15:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Lk 6:39 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=6&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=39) And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?

Firstfruits

This is true of any of God's Word and any who try to follow it. Not only does Deuteronomy give the warning, but also Revelation.

Blessings,
BHS

Firstfruits
Aug 29th 2008, 01:19 PM
This is true of any of God's Word and any who try to follow it. Not only does Deuteronomy give the warning, but also Revelation.

Blessings,
BHS

With regards to the following are those that follow not able to see what is true and what is false?

Rom 11:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=11&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Eph 4:18 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=49&CHAP=4&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=18) Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:

Firstfruits

keck553
Aug 29th 2008, 05:43 PM
Are you still confusing following God with following the traditions of Jews and Gentiles?

Firstfruits
Aug 29th 2008, 06:20 PM
Are you still confusing following God with following the traditions of Jews and Gentiles?

Do those that follow the Jewish religion not believe they are following God, if so where is the confusion?

Those that follow God have not been commanded to follow the Jewish religion, God does not regard the Jewish religion because it contains commandments of men. There is no reason to in the sight of God.

The gospel of Christ is not according to the Torah or else the disciples and those that followed them would not have been persecuted by those that stood for the Jewish religion.

If this is incorrect let me know.

Firstfruits

Emanate
Aug 29th 2008, 07:10 PM
Do those that follow the Jewish religion not believe they are following God, if so where is the confusion?

Those that follow God have not been commanded to follow the Jewish religion, God does not regard the Jewish religion because it contains commandments of men. There is no reason to in the sight of God.

The gospel of Christ is not according to the Torah or else the disciples and those that followed them would not have been persecuted by those that stood for the Jewish religion.

If this is incorrect let me know.

Firstfruits


secret about Judaism, especially in the first century. They were very negative about differing schools of thought that they viewed as started by various rabbis. Y'shua and his disciples were not the only "sects" that were persecuted.

Firstfruits
Aug 29th 2008, 07:28 PM
secret about Judaism, especially in the first century. They were very negative about differing schools of thought that they viewed as started by various rabbis. Y'shua and his disciples were not the only "sects" that were persecuted.

So since the law also had the commandments of men/Rabbis, does that mean that the sects did not abide in the Jewish religion since they did not agree with the teachings?

Firstfruits

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 07:49 PM
Hi I am new to these forums. In the time frame we are discussing "Jewish" was not a religion at all. Jews where a race of people. Specifically Gods chosen people. Gentiles were everyone else: Greeks, etc.

Emanate
Aug 29th 2008, 07:57 PM
Hi I am new to these forums. In the time frame we are discussing "Jewish" was not a religion at all. Jews where a race of people. Specifically Gods chosen people. Gentiles were everyone else: Greeks, etc.


In the first century Judaism was very much a religion.

Emanate
Aug 29th 2008, 07:58 PM
So since the law also had the commandments of men/Rabbis, does that mean that the sects did not abide in the Jewish religion since they did not agree with the teachings?

Firstfruits


In depends on which sect you questioned about the other sects

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 08:06 PM
Yes Judaism is a religion but being Jewish person is belonging to race. Everyone God spoke to before the time of Christ was a Jew. Yes or No?

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 08:15 PM
Actually i still argue that Judaism was not a religion at that time. It was a faith
in God. Religion implies a form of worship open to all people.

Emanate
Aug 29th 2008, 08:21 PM
Yes Judaism is a religion but being Jewish person is belonging to race. Everyone God spoke to before the time of Christ was a Jew. Yes or No?


1. Judaism is a religion, being Jewish is not.
2. No, they were not.

And yes, Judaism allowed conversions. In the first century, the reason alot of Jews had trouble with the Pharisees is because they enforced their brand of Judaism to "true Jews" as is done today.

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 08:25 PM
A Pharisee was not a Jew?

Emanate
Aug 29th 2008, 08:28 PM
A Pharisee was not a Jew?


Of course he was, but I see no evidence that God spoke only to Pharisees.

Adam was not a Pharisee (or Jewish).

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 08:36 PM
There probably many different things going on to make friends & gain power. A person can get an honorary doctorate but its not the same as a true doctorate. Jews were born Jewish.

Emanate
Aug 29th 2008, 08:39 PM
There probably many different things going on to make friends & gain power. A person can get an honorary doctorate but its not the same as a true doctorate. Jews were born Jewish.


Ruth wasnt born Jewish, and that is where David and Y'shua draw their lineage.

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 08:40 PM
Adam was the father of all people Jew & Greek.

Hey Sorry, I am not really trying to be argumentative. What was the original question asked in this Discussion?

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 08:45 PM
Ruth had to tango with ??? to get David & Y'shua.

Emanate
Aug 29th 2008, 09:10 PM
Ruth had to tango with ??? to get David & Y'shua.


She simply said "your people will be my people, your God, my God." Then she married Boaz, if memory serves.

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 09:24 PM
Ruth was a Moabite but she married Boaz who was a Jew making all their children Jewish.

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 09:36 PM
Anyone who descended from Abraham was a Jew except Ishmael who was born through the slave Hagar. Ishmael was the beginning of the Arabs.

keck553
Aug 29th 2008, 09:38 PM
Ruth was a Moabite but she married Boaz who was a Jew making all their children Jewish.

well today, that depends on which rabbi you ask (re: Aliyah)
The Word of God is true. The religion the rabbis such as Shammai and Hillel made it is called Judaism. Judaism had sects, much fewer than, but similar to all the sects in Christianity. Not all Pharisees agreed, indeed some sects were so divided, they didn't allow intermarrage between them. I beleive the Essenes were persecuted also.

The 'religion' grew to the point in the 1st Centure that man made ordinances usurped God's commandments.

I think this nonsense is what Emanate is referring to as 'religion'.

keck553
Aug 29th 2008, 09:40 PM
Anyone who descended from Abraham was a Jew except Ishmael who was born through the slave Hagar. Ishmael was the beginning of the Arabs.

Didn't you just say the offspring of Ruth were Jews because Boaz was a Jew? So why is Ishmael excluded? Wasn't his dad a Jew like Boaz?

Emanate
Aug 29th 2008, 09:40 PM
Anyone who descended from Abraham was a Jew except Ishmael who was born through the slave Hagar. Ishmael was the beginning of the Arabs.


The other 11 tribes did not descend from Abraham?

embankmentlb
Aug 29th 2008, 10:17 PM
The 12 tribes all came from Jacob who was Isaac's son. Ishmael was from a slave so not counted in the inheritance.
Again the Jewish people made themselves into a type of religion but that was an error in their thinking. God punishes them to this day because of this. They were simply the vehicle to deliver Jesus & Christianity.

SIG
Aug 30th 2008, 10:23 AM
Not even the modern nation of Israel has succeeded much in defining "Jew." ;)

And don't forget that wise saying: "Two Jews, three opinions."

Firstfruits
Aug 30th 2008, 10:48 AM
Hi I am new to these forums. In the time frame we are discussing "Jewish" was not a religion at all. Jews where a race of people. Specifically Gods chosen people. Gentiles were everyone else: Greeks, etc.

Welcome Embankmentib,

Whether or not Jewish was a religion, Gods chosen people were not teaching or following or worshiping according to what he had commanded, and this was before the first century.

Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 30th 2008, 10:52 AM
In depends on which sect you questioned about the other sects

How I see it, and forgive me if I am wrong, but they either abided in the religion by following the teaching of the Rabbis or they did not.

Firstfruits

embankmentlb
Aug 30th 2008, 11:48 AM
God gave the Jews the Commandments of Moses knowing they would fall short. They were like a sampling of all men on the planet, evil in heart. They were (are) the example of mans failure to worship God, and yet God brings the savior to the world up through their lineage.

embankmentlb
Aug 30th 2008, 11:56 AM
The problem was that the Rabbis were the ones Not following God. They were the inventors of the "religion" aspect to worshiping God. God never wanted that to be. The common people were just sheep being herded around.

embankmentlb
Aug 30th 2008, 12:22 PM
The Jewish leaders (rabbis) knew to the day the time Jesus was to become know. They were so filled with pride & envy that they would not recognize him. It was fear of losing their place of authority that drove them. Most of the common Jews knew who Jesus was, but like today were to busy surviving to helpless to confront the leadership.

Firstfruits
Aug 30th 2008, 02:25 PM
The problem was that the Rabbis were the ones Not following God. They were the inventors of the "religion" aspect to worshiping God. God never wanted that to be. The common people were just sheep being herded around.

If it was only the Rabbis that were not following God then are the rest that are being taught by the Rabbis not following the Jewish law, as taught by the Rabbis, or were they breaking the Jewish law, since their teaching about the law was according to the Rabbis teaching/doctrine?

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 30th 2008, 02:28 PM
The Jewish leaders (rabbis) knew to the day the time Jesus was to become know. They were so filled with pride & envy that they would not recognize him. It was fear of losing their place of authority that drove them. Most of the common Jews knew who Jesus was, but like today were to busy surviving to helpless to confront the leadership.

With regards to the following Jesus had not yet come; Is 29:13 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=23&CHAP=29&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=13) Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Prov 1:25 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=20&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=25) But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

So what was their reason then?

Firstfruits

Mograce2U
Aug 30th 2008, 04:58 PM
God gave the Jews the Commandments of Moses knowing they would fall short. They were like a sampling of all men on the planet, evil in heart. They were (are) the example of mans failure to worship God, and yet God brings the savior to the world up through their lineage.That strikes me as backwards. You have God giving them a test in order to make them fall. Rather it was because of sin that the law was given to them to keep them unified as a nation, and a way to keep sanctified in His presence so He could dwell among them.

Where the law strengthen sin was so that man might know it and turn to the Lord in repentance. The law brought this distinction to bear in the minds of man showing them the difference between what was profane and what was holy. Israel would not have known this about God otherwise and would have fallen to idolatry and lost their distinction as the people of God altogether unless the times of reformation came under the good kings.

The law was not however the final plan of God given for their redemption. But it kept faith and hope alive until Messiah arrived, and the knowledge that redemption and salvation was yet to come.

If you think about when we were dead in our sins, we had little awareness of what sin even was. Instead we justified ourselves at every turn when consequences either did or didn't work out as we planned. When the law works justification (like in court) a man learns what he has done wrong and it is only then that repentance can be found. Law worked the penalty for sin, for unless there is a penalty to face, sin would only increase.

But the only true way to stop sin is to change the heart of the man. The law could not do that. It could however bring misery upon the lawbreaker and at least make him see the error of his ways. But the cure is when the man no longer desires to engage in his old ways because he now desires to do right.

A thief covets what does not belong to him - whether he continues to steal or not, but a saint is generous to those in need and has compassion and love for his neighbor, and his works reveal his new heart. The law could only change the thief's mind and make him stop stealing, it could not make him do anything other than hide the sin in his heart, so that even his "good" works were still tainted by it. Faith in God however is what can change a man's mind and heart and that is why the promise was given to Abraham for his hope long before the law was brought in for sin.

Firstfruits
Aug 30th 2008, 07:55 PM
That strikes me as backwards. You have God giving them a test in order to make them fall. Rather it was because of sin that the law was given to them to keep them unified as a nation, and a way to keep sanctified in His presence so He could dwell among them.

Where the law strengthen sin was so that man might know it and turn to the Lord in repentance. The law brought this distinction to bear in the minds of man showing them the difference between what was profane and what was holy. Israel would not have known this about God otherwise and would have fallen to idolatry and lost their distinction as the people of God altogether unless the times of reformation came under the good kings.

The law was not however the final plan of God given for their redemption. But it kept faith and hope alive until Messiah arrived, and the knowledge that redemption and salvation was yet to come.

If you think about when we were dead in our sins, we had little awareness of what sin even was. Instead we justified ourselves at every turn when consequences either did or didn't work out as we planned. When the law works justification (like in court) a man learns what he has done wrong and it is only then that repentance can be found. Law worked the penalty for sin, for unless there is a penalty to face, sin would only increase.

But the only true way to stop sin is to change the heart of the man. The law could not do that. It could however bring misery upon the lawbreaker and at least make him see the error of his ways. But the cure is when the man no longer desires to engage in his old ways because he now desires to do right.

A thief covets what does not belong to him - whether he continues to steal or not, but a saint is generous to those in need and has compassion and love for his neighbor, and his works reveal his new heart. The law could only change the thief's mind and make him stop stealing, it could not make him do anything other than hide the sin in his heart, so that even his "good" works were still tainted by it. Faith in God however is what can change a man's mind and heart and that is why the promise was given to Abraham for his hope long before the law was brought in for sin.

Can we truly be righteous in the sight of God without the law according to the following?

Rom 3:21 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=21) But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

Firstfruits

ananias
Aug 30th 2008, 08:01 PM
Not even the modern nation of Israel has succeeded much in defining "Jew." ;)

And don't forget that wise saying: "Two Jews, three opinions."

mmmm.... ever been to bibleforums.org? Methinks it's also 2 Christians, three opinions! :)

ananias

embankmentlb
Aug 30th 2008, 11:36 PM
If the Jews could have lived up to the Laws of Moses there would be no need for Jesus. The law as Godly as it was forced the people into eternal damnation. With out Jesus few Jews would be saved. The Greeks never had a chance. The Bible names in Hebrews the handful of Jews saved from damnation. Everyone else was sacrificed. Jesus is the new way & all who call on him will be saved. The jewish nation to this day has a blind eye towards Jesus. They will all go to hell for their unbelief. When the fullness of the Gentiles has been saved God will open the eyes of the Jewish nation.

Mograce2U
Aug 31st 2008, 12:31 AM
If the Jews could have lived up to the Laws of Moses there would be no need for Jesus. The law as Godly as it was forced the people into eternal damnation. With out Jesus few Jews would be saved. The Greeks never had a chance. The Bible names in Hebrews the handful of Jews saved from damnation. Everyone else was sacrificed. Jesus is the new way & all who call on him will be saved. The jewish nation to this day has a blind eye towards Jesus. They will all go to hell for their unbelief. When the fullness of the Gentiles has been saved God will open the eyes of the Jewish nation.Where did you get this doctrine from? That is so untrue. The law did not force the people into damnation, it helped them to keep their hope alive in Messiah to come. And yet you think this is the work God had in mind when He chose them to be His people? To damn them until some time in the far off future when He would then miraculously save them? Dispensationalism has some real anti-semitic elements to it. Which a better understanding of the gospel would fix I am sure!

Emanate
Aug 31st 2008, 02:04 AM
If the Jews could have lived up to the Laws of Moses there would be no need for Jesus. The law as Godly as it was forced the people into eternal damnation. With out Jesus few Jews would be saved. The Greeks never had a chance. The Bible names in Hebrews the handful of Jews saved from damnation. Everyone else was sacrificed. Jesus is the new way & all who call on him will be saved. The jewish nation to this day has a blind eye towards Jesus. They will all go to hell for their unbelief. When the fullness of the Gentiles has been saved God will open the eyes of the Jewish nation.


Following God's Word = Eternal damnation? is that why YHWH said "these commandments are life for you?

embankmentlb
Aug 31st 2008, 04:20 AM
It is not a big mystery. You can start by reading these 3 books: Matthew, Romans & Hebrews. If you do not understand what are saying you have missed the greatest message of the Bible. We are freed from the bondage of sin & death. We have eternal life in Jesus.

embankmentlb
Aug 31st 2008, 04:25 AM
I sum up the old testament in one short sentence. "The failure of man."

embankmentlb
Aug 31st 2008, 05:47 AM
Hebrews 3:16 5:11
Romans 11:7 9:27-29 9:30-33 10:2 10:21 11:4 11:7-10 11:14-15
Matthew 5:20 8:23

SIG
Aug 31st 2008, 07:48 AM
Can we truly be righteous in the sight of God without the law according to the following?

Rom 3:21 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=21) But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

Firstfruits

It is still disturbing to see a verse pulled from context and used as a proof text. In this case, the verse ends in a semicolon; at least continue until you reach a period. How can you rightly divide Scripture using parts of thoughts?

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Paul is indeed declaring here that no one is or was made righteous by works of the law, but rather by faith in Christ, which he here refers to as "the law of faith."

And while we're here: Regarding the verses from Isaiah and Proverbs which you have quoted a few dozen times (as if repetition will somehow make them more true or applicable)--

You asked me for the context of them a while back, and I gave it. In neither case was Scripture referring specifically to the Church. You never commented or replied.

SIG
Aug 31st 2008, 07:52 AM
mmmm.... ever been to bibleforums.org? Methinks it's also 2 Christians, three opinions! :)

ananias

Well---Christians are grafted in....In some cases, we seem to out-Jew the Jews; two Christians, four opinions--or more...

Firstfruits
Aug 31st 2008, 10:37 AM
It is still disturbing to see a verse pulled from context and used as a proof text. In this case, the verse ends in a semicolon; at least continue until you reach a period. How can you rightly divide Scripture using parts of thoughts?

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Paul is indeed declaring here that no one is or was made righteous by works of the law, but rather by faith in Christ, which he here refers to as "the law of faith."

And while we're here: Regarding the verses from Isaiah and Proverbs which you have quoted a few dozen times (as if repetition will somehow make them more true or applicable)--

You asked me for the context of them a while back, and I gave it. In neither case was Scripture referring specifically to the Church. You never commented or replied.

My apologies if I did not reply, can you remind me what what number it is in?

My question is regarding the fact that the gentiles were not taught/commanded to keep the law, and that the Disciples believed they would be saved in the same way.

Acts 15:11 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=15&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=11) But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

Were they therefore witnesses to righteousness without the law with regards to the gentiles and what they believed themselves?

Rom 3:21 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=45&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=21) But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Aug 31st 2008, 10:44 AM
I sum up the old testament in one short sentence. "The failure of man."

Do you therefore not apply what is written in the OT concerning Jesus, if so would that mean that not everything in the OT is a failure. There are many today that fail to follow Christ according to the Gospel of Christ does that mean that the NT is also "The failure of man"?

Firstfruits

embankmentlb
Aug 31st 2008, 02:13 PM
OT=The failure of man. NT = The love of God.

Despite how bad & evil we are, beginning with Adam, God loves us & gave us his only son Jesus. We now have the choice to live in the glory of a sinless Jesus or try to be Sinless in the energy of our own flesh. Not one person in the history of man has EVER lived up to the requirements of the Law of sin & death. As someone stated above, the Law was given to protect & nurture the Jewish people. God knows the heart of man. We would have destroyed ourselves physically & not only spiritually if it were not for the Law.

Firstfruits
Aug 31st 2008, 02:35 PM
OT=The failure of man. NT = The love of God.

Despite how bad & evil we are, beginning with Adam, God loves us & gave us his only son Jesus. We now have the choice to live in the glory of a sinless Jesus or try to be Sinless in the energy of our own flesh. Not one person in the history of man has EVER lived up to the requirements of the Law of sin & death. As someone stated above, the Law was given to protect & nurture the Jewish people. God knows the heart of man. We would have destroyed ourselves physically & not only spiritually if it were not for the Law.

Remember that a remnant of Israel shall be saved, meaning that not all shall be saved. It is no different today not all shall be saved just because Jesus has been given, not all will worship him.

Firstfruits

embankmentlb
Aug 31st 2008, 03:01 PM
All who Do worship Jesus WILL be saved! All who do not will not.

embankmentlb
Aug 31st 2008, 03:04 PM
The "remnant" will have their eyes opened to Jesus. Until that time God has chosen they will not be saved.

Firstfruits
Aug 31st 2008, 08:47 PM
The "remnant" will have their eyes opened to Jesus. Until that time God has chosen they will not be saved.

Would you agree that in both the old and the new testament/covenant there is the love of God and there is also failure?

Firstfruits

dispen4ever
Aug 31st 2008, 09:28 PM
This is an incredible thread! In spite of insights that answer your many questions, oft repeated, Firstfruits, you come back to the original 4 or 5. I realize that it is not the responsibility of anyone here to judge or to convict you of misapplication / misinterpretation of scripture. What I do realize after reading this thread is that spiritually dividing the Word of Truth is the ONLY way to understand and apply scripture. Take a look at 1 Corinthians 2:1-16 for starters. In 16, cross out "mind" and insert "Spirit". The Holy Spirit is our Teacher. He reveals scripture to us. It is utterly impossible to spiritually divide the scriptures you are quoting without His interpretation. In Him confusion ends. Denominations collapse. Soulish interpretations (soul = mind, will, emotions, intellect, the flesh) fade away. Go to 1 John 1:9, bow low before Him, open your Bible to Genesis 1:1, John 1:1, Hebrews 1:1, 1 John 1:1. Read a couple of verses after each one. Then jump into the Book of Mark. Be blessed! :idea:

timmyb
Aug 31st 2008, 10:33 PM
Would you agree that in both the old and the new testament/covenant there is the love of God and there is also failure?

Firstfruits

now I would have to agree with this... if you start attaching a theme to the old and new testaments you are going to miss the big picture.. he is the same yesterday today and forever... to say that he has changed his character or acted toward us in a different manner is almost to say that God is surprised or unstable... keep in mind that Jesus was sitting on that throne before the foundation of the earth...

the Bible is one book... not two

drew
Sep 1st 2008, 12:35 AM
That strikes me as backwards. You have God giving them a test in order to make them fall.
I think that, strangely enough, God did indeed "make" Israel fall.

Romans 5:20 tells us that the Torah was given to make sin increase. And in Romans 7, we are told that through the Torah, sin became "utterly sinful" in Israel.

But the key element of this argument is perhaps Romans 9, where Paul uses the potter metaphor (drawing on Old Testament use of this metaphor, always in relation to God having the right to mold Israel as He pleases) to argue that God has hardened Israel, just as He hardened Pharoah.

So, indeed, there is a very real sense in which God gives the Torah to Israel with the intent of making her fall.

drew
Sep 1st 2008, 12:41 AM
the Bible is one book... not two
I certainly agree with this and would go further and say that God is not doing one thing with Jesus and another, different, thing with Israel. There is incredible unity in the Scriptures. The Abrahamic covenant has as its purpose nothing less than the salvation of the world. And Jesus fulfills that covenant.

embankmentlb
Sep 1st 2008, 12:46 AM
Would you agree that in both the old and the new testament/covenant there is the love of God and there is also failure?

Firstfruits

I think Paul puts it like this, They (Jews/Israel)have a zeal for God but not according to knowledge. As always God loves everyone but he requires that we must know him. You can stand by all these great things you have done here on earth & God will say thats all wood hay & stubble, I never knew you.
All you need to do is let Jesus into your heart. God will know you.

Firstfruits
Sep 1st 2008, 06:46 AM
This is an incredible thread! In spite of insights that answer your many questions, oft repeated, Firstfruits, you come back to the original 4 or 5. I realize that it is not the responsibility of anyone here to judge or to convict you of misapplication / misinterpretation of scripture. What I do realize after reading this thread is that spiritually dividing the Word of Truth is the ONLY way to understand and apply scripture. Take a look at 1 Corinthians 2:1-16 for starters. In 16, cross out "mind" and insert "Spirit". The Holy Spirit is our Teacher. He reveals scripture to us. It is utterly impossible to spiritually divide the scriptures you are quoting without His interpretation. In Him confusion ends. Denominations collapse. Soulish interpretations (soul = mind, will, emotions, intellect, the flesh) fade away. Go to 1 John 1:9, bow low before Him, open your Bible to Genesis 1:1, John 1:1, Hebrews 1:1, 1 John 1:1. Read a couple of verses after each one. Then jump into the Book of Mark. Be blessed! :idea:

Thank you Dispen4ever,

Your point have been noted, please feel free if you think there may be misapplication and why you may think so.

God bless you

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 1st 2008, 06:49 AM
I think Paul puts it like this, They (Jews/Israel)have a zeal for God but not according to knowledge. As always God loves everyone but he requires that we must know him. You can stand by all these great things you have done here on earth & God will say thats all wood hay & stubble, I never knew you.
All you need to do is let Jesus into your heart. God will know you.

Are you saying then that you agree with the question?

Would you agree that in both the old and the new testament/covenant there is the love of God and there is also failure?

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 1st 2008, 06:57 AM
now I would have to agree with this... if you start attaching a theme to the old and new testaments you are going to miss the big picture.. he is the same yesterday today and forever... to say that he has changed his character or acted toward us in a different manner is almost to say that God is surprised or unstable... keep in mind that Jesus was sitting on that throne before the foundation of the earth...

the Bible is one book... not two

Thanks Timmyb,

If we therefore apply those things that are according to Gods will and not mans traditions/teachings regarding Christ then we sould not go wrong.

I understand that Just as with the Jewish religion that men will teach what has not been commanded but the bible says that we should try the spirits to see if they are of God, and as Jesus said " not everyone that saith Lord,Lord shall enter Heaven.

God bless you

Firstfruits

embankmentlb
Sep 1st 2008, 08:05 AM
Are you saying then that you agree with the question?

Would you agree that in both the old and the new testament/covenant there is the love of God and there is also failure?

Firstfruits

This is a tuff question to answer.
My answer is no.
In the OT we did not love(know) God. Our human nature is such that we cannot love anyone but ourselves.

In the NT our human nature has not changed but the dynamics have changed. Jesus becomes the mediator that joins our evil hearts to a perfect loving God. We now can know God

Firstfruits
Sep 1st 2008, 08:59 AM
This is a tuff question to answer.
My answer is no.
In the OT we did not love(know) God. Our human nature is such that we cannot love anyone but ourselves.

In the NT our human nature has not changed but the dynamics have changed. Jesus becomes the mediator that joins our evil hearts to a perfect loving God. We now can know God

Are you saying that Israel in the OT did not love God, and that is why they did not keep his law, and taught that which God did not command?

Firstfruits

embankmentlb
Sep 1st 2008, 02:56 PM
Are you saying that Israel in the OT did not love God, and that is why they did not keep his law, and taught that which God did not command?

Firstfruits

Let me clarify, Its not that they did not try to love(know) God. They were just not capable of doing so. The same is for the law. Not one person on earth has ever kept the law & its not that we don't try. We just can't. Matthew 5:20 sums it up very well. "Unless your righteousness SURPASSES that of the Pharisees you will not enter the kingdom of heaven". The Pharisees knew God better than anyone & they are not getting in.

Firstfruits
Sep 1st 2008, 03:25 PM
Let me clarify, Its not that they did not try to love(know) God. They were just not capable of doing so. The same is for the law. Not one person on earth has ever kept the law & its not that we don't try. We just can't. Matthew 5:20 sums it up very well. "Unless your righteousness SURPASSES that of the Pharisees you will not enter the kingdom of heaven". The Pharisees knew God better than anyone & they are not getting in.

If that is the case why do we try when God has given us Jesus, and by following what Jesus commanded which is to love one another we fulfil the law of Christ? Which is better than the first covenant/law which as you say no one can keep it completly.

Firstfruits

Emanate
Sep 1st 2008, 03:36 PM
Let me clarify, Its not that they did not try to love(know) God. They were just not capable of doing so. The same is for the law. Not one person on earth has ever kept the law & its not that we don't try. We just can't. Matthew 5:20 sums it up very well. "Unless your righteousness SURPASSES that of the Pharisees you will not enter the kingdom of heaven". The Pharisees knew God better than anyone & they are not getting in.


You fail to realize the ministry of Y'shua. The Pharisees did now know God, they had no need to by their own non Torah commands. Y'shua came to show the will of God. They had their own self righteousness.

Firstfruits
Sep 1st 2008, 03:40 PM
You fail to realize the ministry of Y'shua. The Pharisees did now know God, they had no need to by their own non Torah commands. Y'shua came to show the will of God. They had their own self righteousness.

Is that still the same today, are there still commandments of men being taught for righteousness?

Firstfruits

Emanate
Sep 1st 2008, 03:44 PM
Is that still the same today, are there still commandments of men being taught for righteousness?

Firstfruits

Of course this is still being done in both Judaism and Christianity.

embankmentlb
Sep 1st 2008, 04:20 PM
You fail to realize the ministry of Y'shua. The Pharisees did now know God, they had no need to by their own non Torah commands. Y'shua came to show the will of God. They had their own self righteousness.

That is just not true. It was told in OT scripture to the day Jesus would make himself known to the world. The Pharisees were experts on scripture yet refused to recognize him as the Messiah. They knew full well who Jesus was but fearing their own loss of power refused to recognize him. Is that knowing God?
The Apostle Paul was the perfect Pharisee & he was literally killing those who followed Jesus, hunting them down in the name of God. Is that knowing God?

Emanate
Sep 1st 2008, 04:49 PM
That is just not true. It was told in OT scripture to the day Jesus would make himself known to the world. The Pharisees were experts on scripture yet refused to recognize him as the Messiah. They knew full well who Jesus was but fearing their own loss of power refused to recognize him. Is that knowing God?
The Apostle Paul was the perfect Pharisee & he was literally killing those who followed Jesus, hunting them down in the name of God. Is that knowing God?


Despite your claim, I would say that is NOT knowing God, it is trusting in your own self righteousness. The Pharisees were not expert in Scripture, they were experts in their own interpretation. Sound familiar?

embankmentlb
Sep 1st 2008, 05:16 PM
Despite your claim, I would say that is NOT knowing God, it is trusting in your own self righteousness. The Pharisees were not expert in Scripture, they were experts in their own interpretation. Sound familiar?

Sound familiar?
Hey,If you wish to be a jerk, and don't want to have this discussion, i will bow out any time.
The Pharisees were experts in their own interpretation & not open to learning the truth & that is the point. I would say slaying Jesus, the son of God, was very much their own interpretation.

Emanate
Sep 1st 2008, 05:21 PM
Sound familiar?
Hey,If you wish to be a jerk, and don't want to have this discussion, i will bow out any time.
The Pharisees were experts in their own interpretation & not open to learning the truth & that is the point. I would say slaying Jesus, the son of God, was very much their own interpretation.


If saying that many in Christianity value their own interpretations over the bible make me a jerk, than call me guilty

embankmentlb
Sep 1st 2008, 05:34 PM
If saying that many in Christianity value their own interpretations over the bible make me a jerk, than call me guilty
Well, i guess thats the end of this discussion.

dispen4ever
Sep 1st 2008, 05:43 PM
Firstfruits: Did you do this? It isn't a commanment, obviously, just a recommendation!


Go to 1 John 1:9, bow low before Him, open your Bible to Genesis 1:1, John 1:1, Hebrews 1:1, 1 John 1:1. Read a couple of verses after each one. Then jump into the Book of Mark. Be blessed!

I believe that you need a mentor, someone skilled in spiritually dividing scripture. I, personally, would not give the time of day to a preterist, reformed, or word-faith mentor.

There are two books I strongly recommend and support. You can google just like this:
+ryrie +"classic dispensationalism". Two inexpensive paperbacks are available at the link bookschristian.com, the Charles C. Ryrie page. Choose "Dispensationalism" and "Ryrie's Practical Guide to Communicating Bible Doctrine."

Be blessed!

Firstfruits
Sep 1st 2008, 06:42 PM
Firstfruits: Did you do this? It isn't a commanment, obviously, just a recommendation!



I believe that you need a mentor, someone skilled in spiritually dividing scripture. I, personally, would not give the time of day to a preterist, reformed, or word-faith mentor.

There are two books I strongly recommend and support. You can google just like this:
+ryrie +"classic dispensationalism". Two inexpensive paperbacks are available at the link bookschristian.com, the Charles C. Ryrie page. Choose "Dispensationalism" and "Ryrie's Practical Guide to Communicating Bible Doctrine."

Be blessed!

Thanks Dispen4ever,

Yes I have, there is no problem with what God has given, is with what God has not given in which the problem lies.

Acts 24:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=24&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Acts 28:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=28&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded And testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, And out of the prophets, from morning till evening.


Paul was not concerned with commandments in the law only those things that concerned Jesus.

Acts 20:21 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=20&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=21) Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

Acts 26:21 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=26&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=21) For these causes the Jews caught me in the temple, and went about to kill me.
Acts 26:22 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=26&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=22) Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:

Acts 26:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=26&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Acts 28:31 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=28&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=31) Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.

If we therefore preach beyond what we have been given in the name of Jesus where will it get us?

Mt 7:21 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=21) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

God bless you,

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 2nd 2008, 07:08 PM
Paul was called by Jesus so that he could preach the Good News about Jesus. If Paul had remained as he was would those of the jewish religion that paul was a part of, have persecuted him?

Gal 1:15 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=15) But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,
Gal 1:16 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=16) To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

Firstfruits

Mograce2U
Sep 2nd 2008, 07:40 PM
Excellent point Firstfruits. It is Jesus we preach. Paul was misunderstood because it was the law they wanted to argue about and accused him falsely of teaching against it. They even argued over the resurrection - not so much because Paul preached it, but that it was even their hope. It is hard to preach about faith to a people in whom no faith in the hope they were given even exists!

Emanate
Sep 2nd 2008, 07:42 PM
Paul was called by Jesus so that he could preach the Good News about Jesus. If Paul had remained as he was would those of the jewish religion that paul was a part of, have persecuted him?

Gal 1:15 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=15) But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,
Gal 1:16 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=48&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=16) To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

Firstfruits


You keep returning to the jewish religion. We are speaking of Torah, not the Jewish religion.

Firstfruits
Sep 2nd 2008, 07:49 PM
You keep returning to the jewish religion. We are speaking of Torah, not the Jewish religion.

Was Paul not well versed in the Torah and the Jewish religion?

Did Jesus not call Paul from the Jewish religion the preach about Jesus?

Is the Torah therefore not apart of the Jewish religion?


Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 2nd 2008, 07:54 PM
Excellent point Firstfruits. It is Jesus we preach. Paul was misunderstood because it was the law they wanted to argue about and accused him falsely of teaching against it. They even argued over the resurrection - not so much because Paul preached it, but that it was even their hope. It is hard to preach about faith to a people in whom no faith in the hope they were given even exists!

Thanks Mograce,

I believe that is what Paul was trying to point out.

1 Tim 1:7 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=7) Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

This also shows that Paul was not sent to teach or preach about the law.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 3rd 2008, 07:07 PM
The Spirit of the law should actually be the law of Christ since it is written that Jesus is that spirit.

Why then do we apply Christ to the works of the law of Moses

2 Cor 3:17 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=47&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=17) Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 3rd 2008, 11:58 PM
The Spirit of the law should actually be the law of Christ since it is written that Jesus is that spirit.

Why then do we apply Christ to the works of the law of Moses

2 Cor 3:17 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=47&CHAP=3&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=17) Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

Firstfruits

Um...maybe because HE IS THE AUTHOR??

If you deny the physical, you deny the spiritual.

Emanate
Sep 4th 2008, 02:44 AM
Thanks Mograce,

I believe that is what Paul was trying to point out.

1 Tim 1:7 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=54&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=7) Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

This also shows that Paul was not sent to teach or preach about the law.

Firstfruits


Yet, to the discerning mind, he not only taught and preached about Torah, he went into depth about Torah.

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 06:36 AM
Um...maybe because HE IS THE AUTHOR??

If you deny the physical, you deny the spiritual.

So with regards to the following if we do no do that which Moses gave, that we are am denying Christ?

Jn 1:17 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=43&CHAP=1&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=17) For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 06:44 AM
Yet, to the discerning mind, he not only taught and preached about Torah, he went into depth about Torah.

As Paul said what evere he taught from the Torah or the prophets or the psalms was concerning Jesus.

Acts 26:22 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=26&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=22) Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:
Acts 26:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=26&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Acts 24:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=24&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Acts 28:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=28&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

This is what Paul said he preached/taught

Firstfruits

Emanate
Sep 4th 2008, 12:59 PM
As Paul said what evere he taught from the Torah or the prophets or the psalms was concerning Jesus.

Acts 26:22 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=26&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=22) Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:
Acts 26:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=26&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Acts 24:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=24&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Acts 28:23 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=44&CHAP=28&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=23) And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

This is what Paul said he preached/taught

Firstfruits


I wonder how many could teach and persuade people about Messiah using only the law and prophets.

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 01:30 PM
I wonder how many could teach and persuade people about Messiah using only the law and prophets.

Jesus did it when he taught the disciples.

Lk 24:27 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=24&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=27) And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Lk 24:44 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=24&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=44) And he said unto them, these are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, And in the prophets, And in the psalms, concerning me.

What has changed?

Firstfruits

Emanate
Sep 4th 2008, 02:14 PM
Jesus did it when he taught the disciples.

Lk 24:27 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=24&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=27) And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Lk 24:44 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=24&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=44) And he said unto them, these are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, And in the prophets, And in the psalms, concerning me.

What has changed?

Firstfruits


You tell me what has changed. Could it be because people view the NT as separate from the OT? Do you know many people who could persuade someone of Y'shua using only the law and prophets? I do not.

Mograce2U
Sep 4th 2008, 02:25 PM
You tell me what has changed. Could it be because people view the NT as separate from the OT? Do you know many people who could persuade someone of Y'shua using only the law and prophets? I do not.There was a gospel presentation for the Jew which used this approach. But we see too that the gospel presented to the uncircumcised used creation for its basis. What you don't see very often these days is that saints can do either very well.

The Jew no longer even believes Moses and with the Gentile first you have to argue evolution.

Perhaps that is why Peter instructs us in using our own testimony of what Jesus has done, that we be able to give a reason for the hope that we have in Christ. The cross for forgiveness of sins, the resurrection for our hope in eternal life and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and warning of the coming judgment is sufficient to explain the reason for the hope we have in salvation to anyone.

Emanate
Sep 4th 2008, 03:01 PM
There was a gospel presentation for the Jew which used this approach. But we see too that the gospel presented to the uncircumcised used creation for its basis. What you don't see very often these days is that saints can do either very well.

The Jew no longer even believes Moses and with the Gentile first you have to argue evolution.

Perhaps that is why Peter instructs us in using our own testimony of what Jesus has done, that we be able to give a reason for the hope that we have in Christ. The cross for forgiveness of sins, the resurrection for our hope in eternal life and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and warning of the coming judgment is sufficient to explain the reason for the hope we have in salvation to anyone.

Yes, but Paul also used Torah and prophets to persuade Greeks that were in the synagogue.

I was just musing that church (in the first century) had only the OT. We are not familiar enough with the OT to persuade with it.

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 03:19 PM
You tell me what has changed. Could it be because people view the NT as separate from the OT? Do you know many people who could persuade someone of Y'shua using only the law and prophets? I do not.

How then would they know Jesus if not for the law and the prophets and the Psalms?

Lk 24:44 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=24&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=44) And he said unto them, these are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, And in the prophets, And in the psalms, concerning me.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 03:21 PM
There was a gospel presentation for the Jew which used this approach. But we see too that the gospel presented to the uncircumcised used creation for its basis. What you don't see very often these days is that saints can do either very well.

The Jew no longer even believes Moses and with the Gentile first you have to argue evolution.

Perhaps that is why Peter instructs us in using our own testimony of what Jesus has done, that we be able to give a reason for the hope that we have in Christ. The cross for forgiveness of sins, the resurrection for our hope in eternal life and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and warning of the coming judgment is sufficient to explain the reason for the hope we have in salvation to anyone.

So are you saying that it is all about Jesus?

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 03:25 PM
Yes, but Paul also used Torah and prophets to persuade Greeks that were in the synagogue.

I was just musing that church (in the first century) had only the OT. We are not familiar enough with the OT to persuade with it.

May be we should look and see what is there, as there is everything we need to know about Jesus, his birth, his life, and his death, they are all there Just as Jesus explained to the Disciples.

Lk 24:44 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=42&CHAP=24&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=44) And he said unto them, these are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, And in the prophets, And in the psalms, concerning me.

Firstfruits

Mograce2U
Sep 4th 2008, 03:34 PM
Yes, but Paul also used Torah and prophets to persuade Greeks that were in the synagogue.

I was just musing that church (in the first century) had only the OT. We are not familiar enough with the OT to persuade with it.In a day when Jesus was presenting Himself to Israel in fulfillment of the prophecies, this was definitely the means He used. And since that day we have the eyewitness testimony of His disciples. Are we still proving that Jesus is the Christ, or what He HAS done now that He is risen?

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 03:41 PM
In a day when Jesus was presenting Himself to Israel in fulfillment of the prophecies, this was definitely the means He used. And since that day we have the eyewitness testimony of His disciples. Are we still proving that Jesus is the Christ, or what He HAS done now that He is risen?

It seems as though the law which we are told still stands does not apply to Jesus, even though that is what he came to fulfil.

Firstfruits

valleybldr
Sep 4th 2008, 04:00 PM
Yes, but Paul also used Torah and prophets to persuade Greeks that were in the synagogue.

I was just musing that church (in the first century) had only the OT. We are not familiar enough with the OT to persuade with it. Who's "we?" Those involved in Jewish evangelism do it all the time. todd

Mograce2U
Sep 4th 2008, 05:01 PM
It seems as though the law which we are told still stands does not apply to Jesus, even though that is what he came to fulfil.

FirstfruitsI know Valleybldr might not agree, but it seems that first you have to explain the OT hope in the coming of Messiah to the modern Jew who no longer holds fast to that hope by faith. The Pharisees who at one time believed in spiritual things and the resurrection of the dead, no longer consider faith to be more important than works. Personally I would not expect that avenue to bear much fruit - since you would end up having to explain Moses and the prophets and the hope of Abraham to them.

If they won't believe Moses, neither will they hear One who has risen from the dead. Therefore we preach Jesus and leave it to the Holy Spirit to work.

keck553
Sep 4th 2008, 05:17 PM
Actually the first thing you have to persuade Jews is that 'Christians' who tortured, burned at the stake, and murdered millions of in the name of Jesus weren't Christians at all. None of the mercy and grace Jesus taught seemed to be cherished by Christians then and even to this day.

Then you might remember that the Gentiles had an equal part in the crucifixtion of Jesus, and an exclisive part in mocking Him, whipping Him to near death, and crowning Him with thorny acacia wood and gambling on His personal goods, not to mention what Rome did to His followers in the name of their pagan gods.

If I were a Jew and a Christian came to me with a Greek-thinking Messiah with blue eyes and blond hair and the blood of 2000 years of Jewish blood on his hands, I would question his sincerity too. So who's not allowing entry into the Kingdom of God by their human legalism and traditions?

Dispensationalists.

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 06:50 PM
Actually the first thing you have to persuade Jews is that 'Christians' who tortured, burned at the stake, and murdered millions of in the name of Jesus weren't Christians at all. None of the mercy and grace Jesus taught seemed to be cherished by Christians then and even to this day.

Then you might remember that the Gentiles had an equal part in the crucifixtion of Jesus, and an exclisive part in mocking Him, whipping Him to near death, and crowning Him with thorny acacia wood and gambling on His personal goods, not to mention what Rome did to His followers in the name of their pagan gods.

If I were a Jew and a Christian came to me with a Greek-thinking Messiah with blue eyes and blond hair and the blood of 2000 years of Jewish blood on his hands, I would question his sincerity too. So who's not allowing entry into the Kingdom of God by their human legalism and traditions?

Dispensationalists.

Do you believe that those that kill christians in the name of God/Jesus whether they were Jew or gentile are in the will of God?

Mt 7:21 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=21) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Mt 7:22 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=22) Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Firstfruits

keck553
Sep 4th 2008, 06:55 PM
Oh, do tell us about an entire nation of Christians killed and persecuted over the last 2000 years in the name of Jesus.

dispen4ever
Sep 4th 2008, 06:55 PM
Firstfruits, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the OT and NT. You cannot, must not, use ANY scripture, especially OT against NT, to discount another scripture! You hang on .. I'm going to develop a response for you to think about.

:-)

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 07:09 PM
Oh, do tell us about an entire nation of Christians killed and persecuted over the last 2000 years in the name of Jesus.

Were they doing the will of God or were they doing their own thing?

Mt 7:21 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=21) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Mt 7:22 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=40&CHAP=7&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=22) Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

If you are saying it was the will of God then it must be the same regarding the Jews that killed those that did not keep Gods law, as the Jews are Gods chosen people.

Firstfruits

Firstfruits
Sep 4th 2008, 07:14 PM
Firstfruits, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the OT and NT. You cannot, must not, use ANY scripture, especially OT against NT, to discount another scripture! You hang on .. I'm going to develop a response for you to think about.

:-)

So no NT scripture can discount an OT scripture?

This therefore must be accepted and obeyed as God gave it Correct?

Ex 31:14 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=2&CHAP=31&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=14) Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.

Ex 31:15 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=2&CHAP=31&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=15) Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

Ex 31:16 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=2&CHAP=31&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=16) Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.

Ex 35:2 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=2&CHAP=35&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=2) Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death.

Ex 35:3 (http://bibledatabase.org/cgi-bin/bib_search/bible.cgi?BIBLE=48&BOOK=2&CHAP=35&SEARCH=jesus king lord&Read=Read&FIRST=OK&HV=3) Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the sabbath day.

Firstfruits