Ohhh.. I agree... we are not in a theocracy.. although the very foundation of our laws still show the Judo-Christian faith... but that is getting rubbed out with every day that goes by with all this redefining going on.
.
I agree that many things within our culture show how we've had a Judo-Christian foundation, although I'd disagree in saying our nation was ever "CHRISTIAN" in the Biblical sense when examining all of the things that've happened throughout history which are simply without excuse--and inconsistent. When studying the history of Free-Masonry in our nation and seeing it everywhere, the issue of saying we need to have American return to "righteouenss" always seems to perplex me...and the same goes for many of the laws made that talked of "GOD" and "Christ" but were never applied the same way to all groups
Yeshua never said that the law of Moses was to be ignored either.
Luke 24:44
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.
John 1:17
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
I agree, as the Lord always pointed to Himself whenever it came to the Law and noted how he was truly the fulfillment of the entire law. It was the Lord who was to be the interpreter of what was written previously---and how it'd play out later, whether it be the same or occurring in differing variations.
You know it is like going to the library of congress to read all the laws of the land, and then some historian at the library comes by and explains the love and concern for the citizens of the country that caused this or that law to be made. This is like the Law of Moses it was given and is considered the letter of the law, but Yeshua went forth and explained the deeper purpose which is full of grace and truth
Excellent analogy
I've always tended to see the Law of Moses through the eyes of Christ in the same way one would see the laws of the U.S if going to D.C. For there've been many developments within our nation's history.....and some things that've progressed. Whereas some things that changed NEEDED to do so due to their not being just (as with laws concerning slavery, for popular example), not all things that changed were a sign of something negative occurring previously. For something progressing doesn't mean what used to occur before is somehow bad. To say such would be no more logical than saying that the artwork or artifacts in a Museum such as Smithsonian National Musuem in Washington D.C are somehow "bad" because we don't use them as often anymore. They retain their status of "good" and are still appreciated as the foundation for other developments---but they are not what we still seek to operate in.
It's the same way with other things in life that others experience....and it can alter. For just as a change from something before doesn't mean that it was "bad" in the past, something being good from the past doesn't mean that it is automatically good in the present or that its always applicable to every setting. I'm reminded of curfews...as a 7:00pm curfew being beneficial for children at a certain age doesn't mean that it stops being considered as "good" when more freedoms are given for the children as they grow older. Some things remain constant, such as the fact that being responsible (the purpose behind curfew) and learning boundaries....even though a child looks back acknowleding the previous curfew was beneficial/can be learned from while the new/extended freedoms are ALSO good. But if the child is required to walk in the same way as they were when they were truly a child, then it'd be destructive---and you'd end up having grown up children in the house who are not able to function on their own even when they're being told by the parents to be "adults" while still being placed under things which were given for a season.
I'm reminded of what occurred with the religious leaders trying to trap Jesus by discussing the laws of Moses in regards to divorce (
Deuteronomy 24:2-4 /
Deuteronomy 24 )---as they were focused on what Moses gave in the law and the Lord brought them back to the focus of how things were MEANT to be....and why laws were given (
Matthew 19:7-9 /
Matthew 19,
Mark 10:4-6/
Mark 10 ) Where they had actually glorifed one aspect of what Moses said, the Lord made clear that a specific law was never given because the Lord wanted others to walk in that for all time...but rather, it was given since the people were corrupt/wouldn't honor him and a system had to be given to restrain the damage that could be done to others when marriage wasn't upheld.
The same thing goes for laws made about polygamy, as the Law stated that a man could take another wife as long as he still provided for his first wife (Exo.21:10). And for others who had multiple wives:
- Jacob married Leah and Rachel (Gen.29:23-30; 31:17; 32:22) and then he married Leah and Rachel's handmaids, Zilbah and Bilhahand (Genesis 30:1-24; 37:2)
- Judge Gideon had many wives and a concubine (Judges 8:30-31)
- Elkanah married Hannah and Peninnah (1 Sam.1:2)
- David married Abigail and Ahinoam (1 Sam.25:42-43; 30:18), then later took more wives (2 Sam.5:13) at Jerusalem (1 Chron.14:3)
- In 2 Sam.12:7-8, God gave David these multiple wives as a blessing, just as anointing him as king over Israel, protecting him from Saul, and giving him the house of Israel and Judah were also blessings from Him
- Ashur married Helah and Naarah (1 Chron.4:5)
- Shaharaim married Hushim and Baara (1 Chron.8:8)
- Abijah had 14 wives (2 Chron.13:21)
- Jehoiada the priest had 2 wives (2 Chron.24:3).
Many other examples besides that....but it is not necessarily the case that polygamay was something that ALL were to assume they were to support simply because Moses said something about it in the law---as the Lord Jesus again made clear that God's original intention was for ONE man and ONE Woman to become one.
For anyone to say that the Mosaic code is to be adhered to and yet say it was okay to marry multiple women in our time when in a Messianic Fellowship.....that'd be a bit bizzare when we have more revelation than they did previously. And if the person was not dealt with in the fellowship because he was at least "focusing on the law of Moses", that'd be akin to saying that owning slaves today is permissible because many of the founding Fathers who made the Constitution also had them. .....and many of those individuals focused on the Mosaic Code on slavery, although they perverted alot of stuff (as discussed
here and
here and
here).
Of course, with polygamy, there are some Jewish camps that would not have an issue with it...such as the Indian Jews apart of Bene Israel. The Jews there are said to be descendants of the survivors of an ancient shipwreck. An excellent book on the issue is known as "Burnt Bread and Chutney"...and as the author explains in the preface, the Bene Israel evolved quite uniquely, without many of the holidays, rituals, and rabbinic rulings introduced meanwhile in the general Jewish Diaspora.
They adopted the local language, Marathi, and manners of dress like the sari, along with some of the other Indian customs; they
mostly kept to themselves. They maintained the few ancient Jewish rituals which could be passed on. At the same time, they absorbed Indian influences in prayer melodies and rituals, fasting, pilgrimages, and caste-like ways.
who in some parts are known for still practicing polygamy still as did many of the patriarchs (Abraham, Jacob, etc) and David did---thus angering others there.
One can go here for more (as well as
here). Additionally, one can
go here for more on the subject...but that is another story.
All of that is said to indicate how many things in the Mosaic Law were never given to be done for all time, as many of them were done due to restraint for people who neither had his Spirit...or the same kind of relationship that we have today---and with the Lord Yeshua, who came and gave clarity on what was meant in the Law, as well as alluding on what was yet to come with differing Laws (updates) for new people, that is something that can never be forgotten.
It is funny because you were raised, Consevative/Orthodox yet now hold dear the teachings of the Christian Church. I was raised not knowing we were Jewish, and hearing things like 'cheap Jew' and more, from my gentile Grandfather, which my mother also took on and my father agreeing (step father) and being very confused. Even at an early age I wondered how could those who said they loved Jesus, hate Jews? Now I know why my Grandmother never talked like that. 
