What happened to stoning? (for example)

[plum]

I can't find a thread that talks about this, but I'm sure it's around here somewhere! May I ask though for your guidance in this matter...

I have been inspired by my Christian boyfriend's objections to my insterest in Torah observance, etc (you all know those kinds of arguments)...I am curious why do you (or many) follow some of the Torah to the letter (the exact construction of the mikvah, head coverings for women, etc) and not other parts: like The Sabbatical 7th year, the year of jubilee, Leviticus 1:9 " 'If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother, and his blood will be on his own head.."

He's really afraid of fanaticism, legalism, and all those scary -isms none of us like. He has seen people turn into fanatics about all kinds of thigns and never wants me or him to go in that direction.

How can I talk to him about these things? He says that if we follow the letter of the law, we should be stoning homosexuals and all that.. (couldn't find the scripture he's referring to, but anywho...) how can I tell him that some of the law should be followed to the letter (kosher eating, etc) and some shouldn't/isn't? this is very confusing to me as well...

 

[koilias]

Nice, nice question.

I wanted to pose this question too.

 

[plum]

He just now brought up this passage in response to the eating kosher bit..

***13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. 14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.

***19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

***22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

Does this mean that if you feel obligated, do it, but if you don't don't worry about it? In more or less words...?

 

[koilias]

Does this mean that if you feel obligated, do it, but if you don't don't worry about it? In more or less words...?

Yes. You may be surprised to know that no food is considered "unclean" in Rabbinic Judaism. It is the breaking of the commandment where the sin lies. It is not inherent in the food itself. So knowledge of the commandment makes one sin...If you are ignorant of the commandment no sin lies.

So if you don't know where the food came from, but your brother does, you may cause him to stumble by allowing him to think it is ok to break the commandment. This is the quandary Paul is pointing out to those who ate freely when they were ignorant of the origin of the meat placed before them.

 

[koilias]

But I want to know about the death penalties...What are the reasons they are not enforced? Lack of the temple? Sounds like dispensational thinking...

He, he...I'm trying to encourage my Karaite brethren here to give us their shpiel...

 

[plum]

So now that I'm aware of the foods that are clean/unclean... I should now obey that law?

 

[koilias]

So now that I'm aware of the foods that are clean/unclean... I should now obey that law?

I for one do not think it encumbent upon a gentile. But let's avoid this debate...I want to stick to the death penalty question, because I really want to see the what kind of easy answer our Karaite brethren will give...To my knowledge they have never addressed this question (or I seem to have forgotten if they did).

 

[plum]

Thanks, brother. I'm also very curious what folks make of this.

 

[yod]

Let me take a stab at 'splainin this Lucy.

The Torah was given as much a civil document as anything else. It formed the first and only theocratic government in history with prophets as judges for the people and priests as intercessors to the government.

When Israel was taken captive under Nebuchadnezzar the civil laws of Israel couldn't exactly supercede Babylonian law....nor did they have a Temple for the levitical ordinances. Even this far back (660 BCE?) Torah was no longer applicable in all areas.

This was why they started in Babylon with the first synagogues....which is where the church eventually came from.


In the same way, Yeshua could not be executed by the Sanhedrin without Roman approval.

And Yeshua submitted to Rome's authority even unto death.


"Render unto Caesar" is a hard one for me.....

 

[Torah]

This is my understanding of this. That we are under a time of “undeserved favor”, Grace! Yeshua demonstrated this undeserved favor when thy drought the woman who was caught in adultery to him. [Where was the man? He should have been brought also]
This undeserved favor, in no way justifies adultery, homosexuals, curses father & mother, Etc… In fact Yeshua told her to go and break Torah no more. I believe, this woman completely understood ‘undeserved favor’. Because, if she would have gotten what she, as well as the men wanting to stone her deserve, [I wonder if any of the ones wanting to stone her had been with her?] All should have been stoned. Like I said, this undeserved favor is in no way a nailing to the cross the freedom to commit adultery. Just that the Judgment for it will come later.
I also believe this works hand and hand with what YOD posted.
That Israel being govern under Rome's authority [law] changed things for Israel. But one day He will put all things back in it’s proper order.
Shalom,

 

[CrossingthroughtheBlood]

The man who picked up the first stone dropped by the Rock of His Presence and walked away in repentance.

 

[koilias]

The Torah was given as much a civil document as anything else. It formed the first and only theocratic government in history with prophets as judges for the people and priests as intercessors to the government.

When Israel was taken captive under Nebuchadnezzar the civil laws of Israel couldn't exactly supercede Babylonian law....nor did they have a Temple for the levitical ordinances. Even this far back (660 BCE?) Torah was no longer applicable in all areas.

This is how I've had it explained to me as well. I've heard it further subdivided into the "moral code", "civil code" and "purity/priestly code". Apparently, we are only supposed to follow the "moral code". But I've never heard an Karaitic MJ explain it to me...I"m mighty curious what they think.

 

[Wags]

• Punishment for breaking Torah laws cannot be performed according to civil instruction without a theocratic government in place.

• Theocratic government and the laws that rely on theocratic government cannot be properly instituted without the rule of Mashiach.

The above was taken from The General Principles of Messianic Halachaas proposed by Messianic Bureau International.

Don't know that I agree with everything in this article, but it makes for some thought provoking reading.

 

[Sephania]

But Kariates aren't allowed to answer in here are they? This would have to be asked in the Jewish debate forum if I understand the rules correctly.

My understanding in a nutshell of this question is if you believe Yeshua took all your sins and illnesses and paid the penalty in his flesh, you are saved from death penalty. But you must make repentance and go and sin no more.

 

[plum]

This helps me Todah for everyone's input!

 

[koilias]

But Kariates aren't allowed to answer in here are they? This would have to be asked in the Jewish debate forum if I understand the rules correctly.

Sure...Can a Mod move this thread over there, please? (I know Steve-O in particular does not consider himself MJ). But I want also those of us who reject applied Rabbinic halakha to answer this as well.

 

[Henaynei]

if the OP would like this to move we would be happy to comply

 

[Iollain]

erase that.......beep beep

 

[MyLittleWonders]

Can we go back ever so briefly to the Romans 14 passage (though the death penalty is interesting too ). My understanding is that Paul is speaking of clean food here to begin with - being a Messianic Jew, he would only have refered to something kosher as clean - that pork, shellfish, etc, wasn't even considered food, so it wouldn't ever come into a conversation about food. I thought he was responding to food that is "clean" in that it's kosher, but that's been possibly offered to an idol, as was quite common. So, if you are eating food (which would have only been kosher to begin with) then the problem would arise between Jew/Messianic and pagan, because the J/MJ would have to question if the food was first offered as a sacrifice to a pagan god. Paul is instructing them that the food is clean regardless of who said what over it while it was slaughtered/prepared. As long as it was food as defined by kosher law, then it was food okay to eat. At least that's what I think ...

 

[koilias]

Can we go back ever so briefly to the Romans 14 passage (though the death penalty is interesting too ). My understanding is that Paul is speaking of clean food here to begin with - being a Messianic Jew, he would only have refered to something kosher as clean - that pork, shellfish, etc, wasn't even considered food, so it wouldn't ever come into a conversation about food. I thought he was responding to food that is "clean" in that it's kosher, but that's been possibly offered to an idol, as was quite common. So, if you are eating food (which would have only been kosher to begin with) then the problem would arise between Jew/Messianic and pagan, because the J/MJ would have to question if the food was first offered as a sacrifice to a pagan god. Paul is instructing them that the food is clean regardless of who said what over it while it was slaughtered/prepared. As long as it was food as defined by kosher law, then it was food okay to eat. At least that's what I think ...

Quite possibly. But just to be clear, even if you ate shrimp and pork without your knowledge, no sin is accorded to you in Rabbinic Judaism. Let me stress, its in breaking the commandment itself where the sin lies. All foods are considered "clean" by Paul and his Pharisaic tradition.

But to prevent misunderstandings from happening, Paul urges all to not eat what may be of questionable origin. He upholds the higher standard, even if this means you become vegetarian, for the sake of those who DO consider some foods "unclean".