Under the law??

[yedida]

Why would we interpret Paul by the Essenes? Do you interpret Billy Graham by the Jehovah's Witnesses?

The teachings that I've seen on here before said that "works of the law" referred to the commands of the Pharisees that went over and beyond the written Torah. Why the sudden change? Was it the Pharisees or the Essenes? Are we to just start mixing the phrase in with several different meanings?

Honestly, "works of the law" means "the deeds commanded in the law." That's all it means now, and that's all it meant then. It had nothing to do with the Pharisees and certainly nothing to do with the Essenes.

I would bring the Pharisees in because mainstream has erroneously decided that Yeshua was against anything and everything that they taught, and he wasn't. So I just try to head that argument off at the start.

 

[yedida]

I certain that there are no stoneings in Israel since it's independence was regained &even when under the rule of the Roman empire they could not execute ye-hua. It's been thousands of years since the law could b followed to every jot & title.

That's true. But is that good reasoning in not obeying what we can?

I always like to use the analogy of a most important school exam. You are a straight A+ student and suddenly you come upon a few questions you cannot answer. Do you do the best that you can or hand it in totally blank? Do you accept the best score you can possibly receive or choose to accept a 0?
For that matter, even when the whole law could be obeyed and observed, not every law was written for each and every single person. So absolutely no one, not even Yeshua, could obey each and every law written.

 

[yedida]

So, leaving out the -e- makes sense, since we leave the vowel's out of God's name (in Hebrew). But the -sh- is one letter in Hebrew, so breaking it just seems weird - and changes the word entirely.

Yonah, I think it was very thoughtful of him to try to be so respectful. Let's not fault him just because he was a bit confused. Hebrew, in the beginning can be very daunting.
I applaud his consideration and appreciate it.

 

[yedida]

This KB is killing me but nothing better to do as I sit n day labor waiting for work

What is "KB"? I pray you receive some work. I know that waiting around the day labor offices is not fun and unfortunately you have to physically be there or the job will go to someone else. God bless you.

 

[Lulav]

If the law being spoken of is the Torah, which I think is what it is, than in essence Paul is telling the gentiles that they are not to subject themselves to this law, this Torah.

The Torah however is a covenant between G-d and his people. It is a marriage contract. It was given where he said that he would do certain things for them, including being their husband and king and they in turn were subject to the terms of the ketubah.

In my opinion, Paul, by telling the gentiles they are not subject to it. is basically telling them that can have this husband but they do not have to agree to his contract, his ketubah of marriage.

Think of it this way, you decide to marry someone. When you get to the front of the aisle before the minister/priest he says to you:

'Do you ________
take this man/woman
to be your lawfully wedded husband/wife,
to love and to cherish,
in sickness and in health,
for richer or for poorer,
till death due you part?"
​

And you answer, 'I do' (or I will)

And the minister/priest turns to the man/woman and says:

"Do you ________ take this man/woman?" :o

If this happened to you at the altar what would you think? How would you feel?
​

 

[visionary]

If the law being spoken of is the Torah, which I think is what it is, than in essence Paul is telling the gentiles that they are not to subject themselves to this law, this Torah.

The Torah however is a covenant between G-d and his people. It is a marriage contract. It was given where he said that he would do certain things for them, including being their husband and king and they in turn were subject to the terms of the ketubah.

In my opinion, Paul, by telling the gentiles they are not subject to it. is basically telling them that can have this husband but they do not have to agree to his contract, his ketubah of marriage.

Think of it this way, you decide to marry someone. When you get to the front of the aisle before the minister/priest he says to you:

'Do you ________
take this man/woman
to be your lawfully wedded husband/wife,
to love and to cherish,
in sickness and in health,
for richer or for poorer,
till death due you part?"
​

And you answer, 'I do' (or I will)

And the minister/priest turns to the man/woman and says:

"Do you ________ take this man/woman?" :o

If this happened to you at the altar what would you think? How would you feel?
​

Yep.. God asks Yeshua's bride.. do you take Yeshua as your one and only, and understand no image could come close to representing him by not having any substitutes, not use his tile/name flippantly, respecting and loving Him above everything else, and keep the appointed time He has set aside to meet with you? Will you be respectful and upholding a standard befitting a bride of the king by honoring your family, not lie to anyone, steal from anyone, nor hurt anyone in any manner, and not desire another, or want other people's stuff? And the Bride said... I do...

 

[keepinitsimple]

If the law being spoken of is the Torah, which I think is what it is, than in essence Paul is telling the gentiles that they are not to subject themselves to this law, this Torah.

The Torah however is a covenant between G-d and his people. It is a marriage contract. It was given where he said that he would do certain things for them, including being their husband and king and they in turn were subject to the terms of the ketubah.

In my opinion, Paul, by telling the gentiles they are not subject to it. is basically telling them that can have this husband but they do not have to agree to his contract, his ketubah of marriage.

Think of it this way, you decide to marry someone. When you get to the front of the aisle before the minister/priest he says to you:

'Do you ________
take this man/woman
to be your lawfully wedded husband/wife,
to love and to cherish,
in sickness and in health,
for richer or for poorer,
till death due you part?"
​

And you answer, 'I do' (or I will)

And the minister/priest turns to the man/woman and says:

"Do you ________ take this man/woman?" :o

If this happened to you at the altar what would you think? How would you feel?
​

Forgive me, but I am curious about the line you wrote above (in bold)..
Even gentiles who are not taught the law, cannot purposely walk outside the law(royal law) For though I am not under the law yet, I am not without the law. (The law of Christ) I am assuming the Torah you're speaking is the 10 commandments given to Moses..

The Lord has always taught me that Rom 2:14 shows we are not under the law(as in works of the flesh)
also Gal 3:10

While here find find the law being shown, at least, for the gentiles: Rom 3:31

I'm not quite sure how the MJ's stand in the law that is taught.. To my understanding we are all under the law of Jesus (The two Royal laws which is a law of love) for love is a fullfilling of the law.
Is there something that points the Jewish people to stand separately from
the gentiles in the matters of the law from faith to works?

We are save by Grace through faith, a working, living faith always pointing and leading toward God's Righteousness through the Holy Spirit..

God bless

 

[yedida]

Forgive me, but I am curious about the line you wrote above (in bold)..
Even gentiles who are not taught the law, cannot purposely walk outside the law(royal law) For though I am not under the law yet, I am not without the law. (The law of Christ) I am assuming the Torah you're speaking is the 10 commandments given to Moses..

The Lord has always taught me that Rom 2:14 shows we are not under the law(as in works of the flesh)
also Gal 3:10

While here find find the law being shown, at least, for the gentiles: Rom 3:31

I'm not quite sure how the MJ's stand in the law that is taught.. To my understanding we are all under the law of Jesus (The two Royal laws which is a law of love) for love is a fullfilling of the law.
Is there something that points the Jewish people to stand separately from
the gentiles in the matters of the law from faith to works?

We are save by Grace through faith, a working, living faith always pointing and leading toward God's Righteousness through the Holy Spirit..

God bless

If you have followed the thread there should be no confusion at to what is being referred to, and what the different terms mean.

 

[SGM4HIM]

I hear Keepitsimple saying that gentiles have different marriage vows than their Hebrew counterparts. Not a civil ceremony, or "shack up" mentality, but a sacred vow and relationship also.

 

[yedida]

I hear Keepitsimple saying that gentiles have different marriage vows than their Hebrew counterparts. Not a civil ceremony, or "shack up" mentality, but a sacred vow and relationship also.

Why would they be different? Are gentiles second-class citizens? Or are they more special? Does the Husband not look on his bride as being one? Or is the bride split up?

 

[keepinitsimple]

If you have followed the thread there should be no confusion at to what is being referred to, and what the different terms mean.

There was no confusion. I was simply writing how the gentiles walked in the law according to Gal and Romans, letters being delivered unto the gentiles..

Lulav wrote: "If the law being spoken of is the Torah, which I think is what it is, than in essence Paul is telling the gentiles that they are not to subject themselves to this law, this Torah. "

Here she had written the gentiles are not subject to the laws of the Torah. but yet Jesus has shown the 2 laws He gave fulfilled the whole law.. Just made me question my understanding of the Torah..

 

[keepinitsimple]

I hear Keepitsimple saying that gentiles have different marriage vows than their Hebrew counterparts. Not a civil ceremony, or "shack up" mentality, but a sacred vow and relationship also.

Well, it seems my first post on MJ forum has drawn unusual attention..
Would you mind going back and quoting where I had stated such.. As it
stands your post is in error..

 

[yedida]

There was no confusion. I was simply writing how the gentiles walked in the law according to Gal and Romans, letters being delivered unto the gentiles..

Lulav wrote: "If the law being spoken of is the Torah, which I think is what it is, than in essence Paul is telling the gentiles that they are not to subject themselves to this law, this Torah. "

Here she had written the gentiles are not subject to the laws of the Torah. but yet Jesus has shown the 2 laws He gave fulfilled the whole law.. Just made me question my understanding of the Torah..

Lulav stated that Paul was saying that about the gentiles, not that she did or did not agree with it.

 

[yedida]

I hear Keepitsimple saying that gentiles have different marriage vows than their Hebrew counterparts. Not a civil ceremony, or "shack up" mentality, but a sacred vow and relationship also.

I think the misunderstanding started because I posted to your post. Keepinitsimple wasn't the one bringing up the marriage vows, he was simply asking a question about the Torah. I'm sorry, didn't mean to cause confusion.

 

[yedida]

Well, it seems my first post on MJ forum has drawn unusual attention..
Would you mind going back and quoting where I had stated such.. As it
stands your post is in error..

I'm the one who caused the confusion. Be cool, all is good.

 

[keepinitsimple]

Lulav stated that Paul was saying that about the gentiles, not that she did or did not agree with it.

I stand corrected.. I do apologize..

God bless

 

[keepinitsimple]

I'm the one who caused the confusion. Be cool, all is good.

Normally I only come here to read up on Jewish Holy days, or to get different insights on OT writings.. I just happen to read this topic and replied trying to better understand the Jewish views concerning the law.. My first time posting here that I know of.. Everything's fine..

God bless

 

[visionary]

There was no confusion. I was simply writing how the gentiles walked in the law according to Gal and Romans, letters being delivered unto the gentiles..

Lulav wrote: "If the law being spoken of is the Torah, which I think is what it is, than in essence Paul is telling the gentiles that they are not to subject themselves to this law, this Torah. "

Here she had written the gentiles are not subject to the laws of the Torah. but yet Jesus has shown the 2 laws He gave fulfilled the whole law.. Just made me question my understanding of the Torah..

There are quite a few ways of looking at what Paul wrote...

1.)that Paul did preach, teach and believed since Yeshua's death, His death did do away with God's stuff like His Laws and Moses' laws..
2.)that Paul following an earlier version of a noahidian/godfearer/prostyltite mentality that the Jews used to keep gentiles in a different compartment relationship with God from the privileged one the Jews enjoyed. ....
3.)that Paul started a new religion that is without God's Laws now, and without the Laws of Moses..
4.)that Paul was a Torah observant believer and wanted the Gentiles he was teaching to not make the mistake of obedience to the letter rather than learning how to live via Holy Spirit and intent that God gave His Laws.
5.) that Paul taught the Law of God is so spiritual that it looks nothing like the one written on stone.

and I am sure there are other similar combinations of thought on this subject. I prefer #4 myself.

 

[keepinitsimple]

There are quite a few ways of looking at what Paul wrote...

1.)that Paul did preach, teach and believed since Yeshua's death, His death did do away with God's stuff like His Laws and Moses' laws..
2.)that Paul following an earlier version of a noahidian/godfearer/prostyltite mentality that the Jews used to keep gentiles in a different compartment relationship with God from the privileged one the Jews enjoyed. ....
3.)that Paul started a new religion that is without God's Laws now, and without the Laws of Moses..
4.)that Paul was a Torah observant believer and wanted the Gentiles he was teaching to not make the mistake of obedience to the letter rather than learning how to live via Holy Spirit and intent that God gave His Laws.
5.) that Paul taught the Law of God is so spiritual that it looks nothing like the one written on stone.

and I am sure there are other similar combinations of thought on this subject. I prefer #4 myself.

I do agree with you on #4 as well... Rom 7:22
Excellent post, gives me a better view on how others might view Paul's letters.. Thank you..

God bless

 

[visionary]

I do agree with you on #4 as well... Rom 7:22
Excellent post, gives me a better view on how others might view Paul's letters.. Thank you..

God bless

You are most welcome..