The Covenant is only for Israel - Not the World

[Soyeong]

Acts 15:24 should not be misinterpreted in a way that requires Gentiles to become torah observant Jews, which the quoted post seems to be suggesting. After referring to circumcision and keeping the law as a yoke that even Jewish ancestors could not bear Paul was certainly not telling former pagan gentiles to start going to synagogues where they most certainly would be required to become torah observant.

I did not say that Gentiles should become Jews, but that Gentiles should obey the Torah. Christ spend his ministry teaching His followers how to obey the Torah by word and by example, so Gentiles can choose whether or not to follow him, but Gentiles can't follow him by refusing to follow what he taught, and Acts 15:24 should not be interpreted as ruling that Gentiles should not follow Christ.

Acts 15:10-11 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”

The above verses make it clear that they did not refer to circumcision and keeping the Torah as being a yoke that no one could bear, but rather they were referring to circumcision and keeping the Torah as a means of resulting in our salvation as being a yoke that no one could bear, which was proposed in Acts 15:1, as opposed to salvation by grace. Earning our justification as the result of obeying the Torah has always been a fundamental misunderstanding of the reasons why we should obey it, so while they were opposed to Gentiles obeying the Torah for incorrect reasons they still expected Gentiles to learn over time how to obey it (Acts 15:21).

There were 4 only requirements for former pagan gentile Christians, repeated 3 times

Acts 15:20​

(20) But that we write unto them, that they [1] abstain from pollutions of idols, and from [2] fornication, and from [3] things strangled, and [4] from blood. Acts 15:29 Acts 21:25​

Right here would have been the perfect place for Paul to tell gentiles all they were required to do.
.

Either those passages contain an exhaustive list of everything that would ever be required of mature Gentile believers or they do not, so if you treat them as containing an non-exhaustive list by saying that there are obviously other requirements, such as the greatest two commandments, the Ten Commandments, and things spoken against in verses like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Galatians 5:19-21, and Titus 3:1-3, then you can't also treat it as being an exhaustive list to limit which laws Gentiles should follow. It was not intended as exhaustive lists for mature Gentle believer, but as stated in Acts 15:19-21, it was a list intended to not make things too difficult for new believers, which they excused by saying that they would continue to learn about how to be Torah observant by hearing Moses taught each Sabbath in the synagogues. It was the perfect place for everyone to get on the same page about which things should be taught first to new believers in over to avoid overwhelming them, not a ruling against Gentiles following Christ.

 

[Soyeong]

What did Peter say below about the "yoke" the Jews could not bear? We know he was not talking about circumcision, because it was something he did bear.

Act 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?


.

In Acts 15:11, it shows that the ruling was in regard to the means of salvation, so the yoke that no one could bear was a means of salvation that was opposed to salvation by grace, which is salvation by circumcision as proposed in Acts 15:1. The purpose for which God commanded circumcision was never in order to earn our salvation, so the Jerusalem Council upheld the Mosaic Law by correctly ruling against requiring circumcision for an incorrect purpose, which should not be mistaken as being a ruling against obeying what God has commanded as if the Jerusalem Council had the authority to countermand God.

In Isaiah 45:17, it says that all Israel will be saved, which I think is what most likely led some people to mistakenly think that Gentiles just need to become joined to Israel by going through the conversion process of becoming a Jew involving circumcision in order to become saved. Paul argued against this in places like Romans 9:6-8, where the children of Israel are not those who are physically descended from Israel, but those who have faith in the promise. In Romans 2:25-29, Paul said that the way to recognize that a Gentile has a circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Torah, which is the same way to tell for a Jew (Deuteronomy 30:6), and that a true Jew was not just circumcised in the flesh, but also circumcised in the heart. Likewise, in John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works as him, so the way that the children are multiplied and are a blessing to the nations through faith in the promise is by turning Jews and Gentiles from their wickedness and teaching them to do the same works as Abraham by obey God's law in accordance with the Gospel that was made known in advance to him (Acts 3:25-26, Galatians 3:8). For someone to teach against obeying the Torah would be to oppose both the Gospel and faith in the promise.

 

[BABerean2]

In Acts 15:11, it shows that the ruling was in regard to the means of salvation, so the yoke that no one could bear was a means of salvation that was opposed to salvation by grace, which is salvation by circumcision as proposed in Acts 15:1. The purpose for which God commanded circumcision was never in order to earn our salvation, so the Jerusalem Council upheld the Mosaic Law by correctly ruling against requiring circumcision for an incorrect purpose, which should not be mistaken as being a ruling against obeying what God has commanded as if the Jerusalem Council had the authority to countermand God.

In Isaiah 45:17, it says that all Israel will be saved, which I think is what most likely led some people to mistakenly think that Gentiles just need to become joined to Israel by going through the conversion process of becoming a Jew involving circumcision in order to become saved. Paul argued against this in places like Romans 9:6-8, where the children of Israel are not those who are physically descended from Israel, but those who have faith in the promise. In Romans 2:25-29, Paul said that the way to recognize that a Gentile has a circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Torah, which is the same way to tell for a Jew (Deuteronomy 30:6), and that a true Jew was not just circumcised in the flesh, but also circumcised in the heart. Likewise, in John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works as him, so the way that the children are multiplied and are a blessing to the nations through faith in the promise is by turning Jews and Gentiles from their wickedness and teaching them to do the same works as Abraham by obey God's law in accordance with the Gospel that was made known in advance to him (Acts 3:25-26, Galatians 3:8). For someone to teach against obeying the Torah would be to oppose both the Gospel and faith in the promise.

It was not me who spoke of the "two covenants", and and told the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai Covenant of "bondage" in Galatians 4:24-31. That was the Apostle Paul.

It was not me who said we are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18, or that we are come instead to the new covenant church of Mount Sion and the blood of Jesus in Hebrews 12:22-24. That was the author of the Book of Hebrews, which had to be either Paul or Luke. Why? Because it was Paul who contrasted the two covenants in 2 Cor. 3:6-8.



.

 

[Der Alte]

I did not say that Gentiles should become Jews, but that Gentiles should obey the Torah. Christ spend his ministry teaching His followers how to obey the Torah by word and by example, so Gentiles can choose whether or not to follow him, but Gentiles can't follow him by refusing to follow what he taught, and Acts 15:24 should not be interpreted as ruling that Gentiles should not follow Christ.
Acts 15:10-11 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”
The above verses make it clear that they did not refer to circumcision and keeping the Torah as being a yoke that no one could bear, but rather they were referring to circumcision and keeping the Torah as a means of resulting in our salvation as being a yoke that no one could bear, which was proposed in Acts 15:1, as opposed to salvation by grace. Earning our justification as the result of obeying the Torah has always been a fundamental misunderstanding of the reasons why we should obey it, so while they were opposed to Gentiles obeying the Torah for incorrect reasons they still expected Gentiles to learn over time how to obey it (Acts 15:21).
Either those passages contain an exhaustive list of everything that would ever be required of mature Gentile believers or they do not, so if you treat them as containing an non-exhaustive list by saying that there are obviously other requirements, such as the greatest two commandments, the Ten Commandments, and things spoken against in verses like 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, Galatians 5:19-21, and Titus 3:1-3, then you can't also treat it as being an exhaustive list to limit which laws Gentiles should follow. It was not intended as exhaustive lists for mature Gentle believer, but as stated in Acts 15:19-21, it was a list intended to not make things too difficult for new believers, which they excused by saying that they would continue to learn about how to be Torah observant by hearing Moses taught each Sabbath in the synagogues. It was the perfect place for everyone to get on the same page about which things should be taught first to new believers in over to avoid overwhelming them, not a ruling against Gentiles following Christ.

The same ol' Judaizing arguments. The only way gentiles would have been routinely accepted in the synagogues was if they became Jewish proselytes. Paul, a pharisee, had to be struck blind for him to accept gentiles. And Paul a jew was persecuted everywhere he went for preaching Jesus.
Here are a few quotes from the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia concerning gentiles.

"the Torah was given as a heritage to Israel, a non-Israelite deserves death if he studies it (Sanh. 59a)."
"Resh Laḳish (d. 278) said, "A Gentile observing the Sabbath deserves death" (Sanh. 58b). This refers to a Gentile who accepted the seven laws of the Noachidæ, inasmuch as "the Sabbath is a sign between God and Israel alone,"
" "The Torah outlawed the issue of a Gentile as that of a beast" (Miḳ. viii. 4, referring to Ezek. l.c.)."​

GENTILE - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

 

[Soyeong]

It was not me who spoke of the "two covenants", and and told the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai Covenant of "bondage" in Galatians 4:24-31. That was the Apostle Paul.

I agree that there are two covenants and that we are under the New Covenant and not the Mosaic Covenant, so I have been speaking about the way to follow the New Covenant, which still; involves following the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33).

The view that we have of the law matches the view that we have of the view of the giver of the Lawgiver, for example, God is trustworthy, therefore His law is also trustworthy (Psalms 19:7), and a Torah that is holy, righteous, and good can only come from a God who is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12). The Psalms express an extremely positive view of the Torah, such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it, which certainly matched his view of the Lawgiver, so if we consider the Psalms to be Scripture and to therefore express a correct view of the Torah, then we will share it as Paul did (Romans 7:22), and we will interpret the NT authors as though they were in complete agreement with the view of the Torah expressed in the Psalms. For example, according to Psalms 1:1-2, blessed are those who love the Torah of the Lord and who mediate on it day and night, so we can't believe in the truth of these words while not allowing them to shape our view of the Torah, and any view of the Torah less than that we ought to delight in obeying it is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture, especially having such a low view of the Lawgiver that you consider His instructions to be bondage.

If God saved his children out of bondage in Egypt in order to put us under bondage to His law, then it would be for bondage that God sets us free, however, Galatians 5:1 says that it is for freedom that God sets us free, which completely undermines how you are interpreting Galatians 4:24-31. In Psalms 119:142, the Torah is truth, and in John 8:31-36, it is sin in transgression of the Torah that puts us in bondage while it is truth that sets us free. Furthermore, in regard to Galatians 4:24-31, the Torah came through the line of the free woman, not the line of the slave woman, so you're completely missing Paul's point.

It was not me who said we are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18, or that we are come instead to the new covenant church of Mount Sion and the blood of Jesus in Hebrews 12:22-24. That was the author of the Book of Hebrews, which had to be either Paul or Luke. Why? Because it was Paul who contrasted the two covenants in 2 Cor. 3:6-8.

I keep agreeing that there are two covenants that are not the same, so I'm not sure why you keep arguing that point.

2 Corinthians 3:6 who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

In Jeremiah 31:33, the New Covenant still involves following the Torah, in Ezekiel 36:26-27, the New Covenant involves the Spirit leading us to obey the Torah, and in Deuteronomy 30:15-20, obedience to the Torah brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! There are many other verses that say similar things, so 2 Corinthians 3:6-8 needs to be understood in a manner that is in accordance with these other verses and not a way that is contrary to them, which means that "the letter" should not be interpreted as referring to correctly obeying the Torah. Furthermore, if it were true that correctly obeying what God instructed leads to death, then that would mean that God is misleading us and should not be trusted.

 

[Soyeong]

The same ol' Judaizing arguments. The only way gentiles would have been routinely accepted in the synagogues was if they became Jewish proselytes. Paul, a pharisee, had to be struck blind for him to accept gentiles. And Paul a jew was persecuted everywhere he went for preaching Jesus.

That is an ad hominem and you neglected to explain why you think that my arguments are wrong, but just argued for a contrary position. Christ spent his ministry teaching how to practice Judaism in obedience to the Torah by word and by example and Paul's problem with the Judauzers was not that they were teaching Gentiles how to follow Christ, but that they were wanting to require all Gentiles to become circumcised and obey their works of the law in order to become saved, which is a position that I have never supported, so I am in complete agreement with Paul's opposition to the Judaizers. In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith who were all zealous for the Torah, which is in accordance with believing in what Jesus gave himself to accomplish through the cross (Acts 21:20), so they had the numbers for there to synagogues filled with Torah observant Jews with faith in Christ who would have welcomed Gentile converts in accordance with Peter's vision in Acts 10.

Here are a few quotes from the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia concerning gentiles.

"the Torah was given as a heritage to Israel, a non-Israelite deserves death if he studies it (Sanh. 59a)."​

"Resh Laḳish (d. 278) said, "A Gentile observing the Sabbath deserves death" (Sanh. 58b). This refers to a Gentile who accepted the seven laws of the Noachidæ, inasmuch as "the Sabbath is a sign between God and Israel alone," ​

" "The Torah outlawed the issue of a Gentile as that of a beast" (Miḳ. viii. 4, referring to Ezek. l.c.)."​

GENTILE - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

www.jewishencyclopedia.com

In Matthew 23:15, there were scribes and Pharisees who traveled over sea and land to make a single convert, so there were some Jews who were more accepting of Gentiles than others. The Talmud presents a wide variety of views in an ongoing discussion, not a unified view that everyone holds to, so it is very easy to take it out of context on accident, though it is is clear that you are deliberately taking those quotes from that article out of context as anyone who reads that article can see.

 

[Der Alte]

That is an ad hominem and you neglected to explain why you think that my arguments are wrong, but just argued for a contrary position. Christ spent his ministry teaching how to practice Judaism in obedience to the Torah by word and by example and Paul's problem with the Judauzers was not that they were teaching Gentiles how to follow Christ, but that they were wanting to require all Gentiles to become circumcised and obey their works of the law in order to become saved, which is a position that I have never supported, so I am in complete agreement with Paul's opposition to the Judaizers. In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith who were all zealous for the Torah, which is in accordance with believing in what Jesus gave himself to accomplish through the cross (Acts 21:20), so they had the numbers for there to synagogues filled with Torah observant Jews with faith in Christ who would have welcomed Gentile converts in accordance with Peter's vision in Acts 10.
In Matthew 23:15, there were scribes and Pharisees who traveled over sea and land to make a single convert, so there were some Jews who were more accepting of Gentiles than others. The Talmud presents a wide variety of views in an ongoing discussion, not a unified view that everyone holds to, so it is very easy to take it out of context on accident, though it is is clear that you are deliberately taking those quotes from that article out of context as anyone who reads that article can see.

Incorrect. An ad hominem addresses the person, I addressed the argument, not the person. Matt 23:15 is about making Jewish proselytes NOT gentile Christians fellowshipping with Jews. The way Paul was persecuted shows how gentile Christians would have been treated in the synagogues. Have you actually read the Jewish Encyclopedia? I took nothing out of context.

 

[Soyeong]

Incorrect. An ad hominem addresses the person, I addressed the argument, not the person.

You addressed the person by calling me a Judaizer in like of addressing the arguments that I gave, which is exactly what an adhomiem is. For example, you said nothing in regard to what I said about Acts 15:10-11 or Acts 15:1.

Matt 23:15 is about making Jewish proselytes NOT gentile Christians fellowshipping with Jews. The way Paul was persecuted shows how gentile Christians would have been treated in the synagogues.

Gentiles need preparation and acceptance before they become proselytes. Paul was sent our by Jerusalem to search out for people to persecute, which is by no means how Gentiles were treated by Jews in general. Again, with tens of thousands of Jews coming to faith, Gentiles could have easily found many synagogues where all the Jews were Christians who would have accepted them in accordance with Acts 10.

Have you actually read the Jewish Encyclopedia? I took nothing out of context.

Yes. For example:

Another reason for discrimination was the vile and vicious character of the Gentiles: "I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation " (

= "vile," "contemptible"; Deut. xxxii. 21). The Talmud says that the passage refers to the Gentiles of Barbary and Mauretania, who walked nude in the streets (Yeb. 63b), and to similar Gentiles, "whose flesh is as the flesh of asses and whose issue is like the issue of horses" (Ezek. xxiii. 20); who can not claim a father (Yeb. 98a). The Gentiles were so strongly suspected of unnatural crimes that it was necessary to prohibit the stabling of a cow in their stalls ('Ab. Zarah ii. 1). Assaults on women were most frequent, especially at invasions and after sieges (Ket. 3b), the Rabbis declaring that in case of rape by a Gentile the issue should not be allowed to affect a Jewish woman's relation to her husband. "The Torah outlawed the issue of a Gentile as that of a beast" (Miḳ. viii. 4, referring to Ezek. l.c.).

You want to pretend like all Gentiles were viewed as beasts, but ignore that it is speaking about Gentiles from a specific area who were doing vile acts and the reason for the ruling to protect women, and instead you want take that quote out of context on order present like it is showing that Jews were mistreating Gentiles.

 

[Der Alte]

You addressed the person by calling me a Judaizer in like of addressing the arguments that I gave, which is exactly what an adhomiem is. For example, you said nothing in regard to what I said about Acts 15:10-11 or Acts 15:1.

I clearly said "Judaizing argument".

Gentiles need preparation and acceptance before they become proselytes. Paul was sent our by Jerusalem to search out for people to persecute, which is by no means how Gentiles were treated by Jews in general. Again, with tens of thousands of Jews coming to faith, Gentiles could have easily found many synagogues where all the Jews were Christians who would have accepted them in accordance with Acts 10.

Neither Paul nor any of the other NT writers were in the business of recruiting Jewish proselytes. Do you have any scripture to support the supposition that "Gentiles could have easily found many synagogues where all the Jews were Christians who would have accepted them in accordance with Acts 10?"

Yes. For example:
Another reason for discrimination was the vile and vicious character of the Gentiles: "I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation " (

= "vile," "contemptible"; Deut. xxxii. 21). The Talmud says that the passage refers to the Gentiles of Barbary and Mauretania, who walked nude in the streets (Yeb. 63b), and to similar Gentiles, "whose flesh is as the flesh of asses and whose issue is like the issue of horses" (Ezek. xxiii. 20); who can not claim a father (Yeb. 98a). The Gentiles were so strongly suspected of unnatural crimes that it was necessary to prohibit the stabling of a cow in their stalls ('Ab. Zarah ii. 1). Assaults on women were most frequent, especially at invasions and after sieges (Ket. 3b), the Rabbis declaring that in case of rape by a Gentile the issue should not be allowed to affect a Jewish woman's relation to her husband. "The Torah outlawed the issue of a Gentile as that of a beast" (Miḳ. viii. 4, referring to Ezek. l.c.).
You want to pretend like all Gentiles were viewed as beasts, but ignore that it is speaking about Gentiles from a specific area who were doing vile acts and the reason for the ruling to protect women, and instead you want take that quote out of context on order present like it is showing that Jews were mistreating Gentiles.

See my highlights for what you ignored. Jewish synagogues would not have accepted uncircumcised gentiles. As I said Paul was persecuted everywhere he went for preaching Jesus as the messiah. Synagogues would NOT have accepted uncircumsized gentile Christians.

 

[BABerean2]

the New Covenant involves the Spirit leading us to obey the Torah,

Dangers of the Hebrew Roots Movement: Book of Philippians, Those of the "circumcision"...

.

 

[Soyeong]

I clearly said "Judaizing argument".

The view that you have of someone matches the view that you have of their arguments. What else makes someone a Judaizer is that they are using Judaizing arguments, so by saying that I am using Judaizing arguments you are also saying that I am a Judaizer. In any case, you used spoke negatively about my arguments instead of explaining why they are wrong, such not ignoring what I said in regard to Acts 15:10-11 and Acts 15:1.

Neither Paul nor any of the other NT writers were in the business of recruiting Jewish proselytes. Do you have any scripture to support the supposition that "Gentiles could have easily found many synagogues where all the Jews were Christians who would have accepted them in accordance with Acts 10?"

I have never suggested that they were in the business of recruiting Jewish proselytes, so again it is strange that you would think that I was using Judaizing arguments.

Again, in Acs 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to were coming to faith, so these Jews could have joined synagogues with other like-minded people or formed their own, which Gentiles would have been welcomed to attend in accordance with Acts 10. Again, in Acts 15:21, the expectation was that Gentiles were welcome to attend synagogues every Sabbath, so there must have been good reason to have that expectation.

See my highlights for what you ignored. Jewish synagogues would not have accepted uncircumcised gentiles. As I said Paul was persecuted everywhere he went for preaching Jesus as the messiah. Synagogues would NOT have accepted uncircumsized gentile Christians.

Your other quotes from that article are also out of context, though it is strange that you won't admit that the example that I quoted from the article is something that you took out of context. In context it is clearly talking about Jews being persecuted by Gentiles rather this the other way around.

Sorry, I misread what you said about Paul being persecuted rather than persecuting others. After the inclusion of Gentiles in Acts 10, synagogues populated by the tens of thousands of Christian Jews would have had no reason to persecute or not accept Christian Gentiles, though synagogues populated by non-Christian Jews might have had reason to persecute Gentiles, so Gentiles could attend the synagogues populated by Christian Jews. Paul faced persecution by non-Christian Jews because he was actively going into their synagogues and trying to persuade them to become Christians, so Gentiles who were not doing that would not have faced the same persecution.

 

[Der Alte]

The view that you have of someone matches the view that you have of their arguments. What else makes someone a Judaizer is that they are using Judaizing arguments, so by saying that I am using Judaizing arguments you are also saying that I am a Judaizer. In any case, you used spoke negatively about my arguments instead of explaining why they are wrong, such not ignoring what I said in regard to Acts 15:10-11 and Acts 15:1.
I have never suggested that they were in the business of recruiting Jewish proselytes, so again it is strange that you would think that I was using Judaizing arguments.
Again, in Acs 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to were coming to faith, so these Jews could have joined synagogues with other like-minded people or formed their own, which Gentiles would have been welcomed to attend in accordance with Acts 10. Again, in Acts 15:21, the expectation was that Gentiles were welcome to attend synagogues every Sabbath, so there must have been good reason to have that expectation.
Your other quotes from that article are also out of context, though it is strange that you won't admit that the example that I quoted from the article is something that you took out of context. In context it is clearly talking about Jews being persecuted by Gentiles rather this the other way around.
Sorry, I misread what you said about Paul being persecuted rather than persecuting others. After the inclusion of Gentiles in Acts 10, synagogues populated by the tens of thousands of Christian Jews would have had no reason to persecute or not accept Christian Gentiles, though synagogues populated by non-Christian Jews might have had reason to persecute Gentiles, so Gentiles could attend the synagogues populated by Christian Jews. Paul faced persecution by non-Christian Jews because he was actively going into their synagogues and trying to persuade them to become Christians, so Gentiles who were not doing that would not have faced the same persecution.

Much of what you posted is supposition, conjecture what might or could have happened. I quoted NOTHING out-of-context, that is why I provided a link. If you think so show me exactly how. Here is what Jesus said would happen.

Matthew 23:34​

(34) Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:​

Mark 13:9​

(9) But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.​

Luke 21:12​

(12) But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.​

John 16:2​

(2) They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.​

And that is what happened, remember Stephen when we first meet Paul?
ETA: How would new Christians, regularly attending Jewish synagogues, become mature Christian? They certainly would not learn anything about Jesus in a synagogue.

 

[Soyeong]

Much of what you posted is supposition, conjecture what might or could have happened.

You are excellent at insulting my arguments and thereby me, but your inability to show how what I said is wrong is showing.

I quoted NOTHING out-of-context, that is why I provided a link. If you think so show me exactly how.

Again:

"Another reason for discrimination was the vile and vicious character of the Gentiles: "I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation " (

= "vile," "contemptible"; Deut. xxxii. 21). The Talmud says that the passage refers to the Gentiles of Barbary and Mauretania, who walked nude in the streets (Yeb. 63b), and to similar Gentiles, "whose flesh is as the flesh of asses and whose issue is like the issue of horses" (Ezek. xxiii. 20); who can not claim a father (Yeb. 98a). The Gentiles were so strongly suspected of unnatural crimes that it was necessary to prohibit the stabling of a cow in their stalls ('Ab. Zarah ii. 1). Assaults on women were most frequent, especially at invasions and after sieges (Ket. 3b), the Rabbis declaring that in case of rape by a Gentile the issue should not be allowed to affect a Jewish woman's relation to her husband. "The Torah outlawed the issue of a Gentile as that of a beast" (Miḳ. viii. 4, referring to Ezek. l.c.)."

You quoted the last line of the above passage in order to support your that Gentiles are being persecuted by Jews, however you ignored that everything else in that passage is speaking about Gentiles of a specific area doing vile things including frequently raping Jewish women and that the point of the final line is to protect their relations with their husbands in the case that she conceives.

Here is what Jesus said would happen.

Matthew 23:34​

(34) Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:​

Mark 13:9​

(9) But take heed to yourselves: for they shall deliver you up to councils; and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten: and ye shall be brought before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them.​

Luke 21:12​

(12) But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.​

John 16:2​

(2) They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service.​

And that is what happened, remember Stephen when we first meet Paul?

All of those examples are of people being persecuted because they were bearing witness about Jesus. I attend a congregation of like-minded believers and I face no persecution from them, but if I were to go into a mosque or a non-Christian synagogue in order to proclaim the Gospel, then I might face persecution. You have given no reason why Gentiles couldn't have joined synagogues populated by Christian Jews where they would face no persecution. Sure, they could heave over to synagogues populated by non-Christian Jews and be persecuted for proclaiming the Gospel, but that is not something that new believers who were starting to learn the basics of the Torah would have been expected to do.

 

[Der Alte]

You are excellent at insulting my arguments and thereby me, but your inability to show how what I said is wrong is showing.

Certainly did and will do so again.

Again:
"Another reason for discrimination was the vile and vicious character of the Gentiles: "I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation " (

= "vile," "contemptible"; Deut. xxxii. 21). The Talmud says that the passage refers to the Gentiles of Barbary and Mauretania, who walked nude in the streets (Yeb. 63b), and to similar Gentiles, "whose flesh is as the flesh of asses and whose issue is like the issue of horses" (Ezek. xxiii. 20); who can not claim a father (Yeb. 98a). The Gentiles were so strongly suspected of unnatural crimes that it was necessary to prohibit the stabling of a cow in their stalls ('Ab. Zarah ii. 1). Assaults on women were most frequent, especially at invasions and after sieges (Ket. 3b), the Rabbis declaring that in case of rape by a Gentile the issue should not be allowed to affect a Jewish woman's relation to her husband. "The Torah outlawed the issue of a Gentile as that of a beast" (Miḳ. viii. 4, referring to Ezek. l.c.)."

You ignored the fact that what you emphasized also said "and to similar Gentiles, "whose flesh is as the flesh of asses and whose issue is like the issue of horses" (Ezek. xxiii. 20);" Check highlights in above. You continue to ignore the words of Jesus.

You quoted the last line of the above passage in order to support your that Gentiles are being persecuted by Jews, however you ignored that everything else in that passage is speaking about Gentiles of a specific area doing vile things including frequently raping Jewish women and that the point of the final line is to protect their relations with their husbands in the case that she conceives.

I ignored nothing. Does NOT negate the fact that Jews were hostile to gentiles NOT just from specific locations see Ezek 23:20. above.

All of those examples are of people being persecuted because they were bearing witness about Jesus. I attend a congregation of like-minded believers and I face no persecution from them, but if I were to go into a mosque or a non-Christian synagogue in order to proclaim the Gospel, then I might face persecution. You have given no reason why Gentiles couldn't have joined synagogues populated by Christian Jews where they would face no persecution. Sure, they could heave over to synagogues populated by non-Christian Jews and be persecuted for proclaiming the Gospel, but that is not something that new believers who were starting to learn the basics of the Torah would have been expected to do.

There were no synagogues populated by "Christian Jews" in the early centuries of the Christian church. I'm waiting for any kind of credible, verifiable, historical evidence that uncircumcised former pagan Christians, who were not Jewish proselytes, regularly attended synagogues with Torah observant Jews. The Jewish history I quoted certainly does not do so.

 

[Soyeong]

Dangers of the Hebrew Roots Movement: Book of Philippians, Those of the "circumcision"...

Indeed, according to Ezekiel 36:26-27, the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Torah under the New Covenant in John 16:13, the Spirit has the role of leading us in truth, and in Psalms 119:142, the Torah is truth. I'm not part of the Hebrew Roots Movement, but you should be far more concerned with the danger of you opposing truth.

In Psalms 119:53, he said that hot indignation seizes him because of the wicked who forsake the Torah. God did not command to do evil in the Torah, but to do what is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), and Christ did not do evil when he set a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so it is completely absurd to think that the evil doers are those who are teaching people to obey what God has commanded in accordance with following Christ's example. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is, so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which he prophesied would be proclaimed to all nations (Matthew 24:12-14), so it is again absurd to think that people are undermining the work of Christ by teaching people to obey the Torah that he taught by word and by example. In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah is the way to believe in everything that he accomplished through his ministry and through the cross, not the way to undermine his work or the way to say that what he did is not enough.

God is trustworthy, therefore the Torah is also trustworthy (Psalms 19:7), so relying on what God has instructed is the way to rely on God, not the way to rely on our own effort, while considering what God has instructed to be untrustworthy is also considering God to be untrustworthy. The Torah is God's word and Jesus is God's word made flesh, so it is contradictory for someone to want to put their faith in Jesus, but not put their faith in the Torah. In Romans 8:4-7, those who walk in the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh, who are enemies of God, who refuse to submit to the Torah. In Galatians 5:19-23, everything listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Torah while all of the fruits of the Spirit are in accordance with it. The Torah is God's instructions for how to have faith, not the way to add our own effort on top of our faith.

In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah that he might know Him and Israel too, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so knowing God and Jesus is the goal of the Torah, which is eternal life (John 17:3) and righteousness for everyone who has faith (Romans 10:2-4). So Philippians 3 should not be interpreted as saying that the Torah is rubbish and we need to focus on knowing Jesus instead, but rather Paul had been obeying the Torah without being focused and knowing Jesus, so he had been missing the whole goal of the Torah, and that is what he counted as rubbish.

Jesus set a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so he was much more zealous for it than the Pharisees were, and he never criticized them for obeying it, but he did criticize them for not obeying it or for not obeying it correctly. For example, in Mark 7:6-9, Jesus said that the Pharisees were hypocrites for setting aside the commands of God in order to establish their own traditions. In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that tithing was something that they ought to be doing while not neglecting weightier matters of the Torah of justice, mercy, and faith, so he was not coming against their obedience to the Torah, but rather he was calling them to a higher level of obedience to it in a manner that is in accordance with its weightier matters.

While we do not earn our righteousness by obeying God, that does not mean that we are not still obligated to obey what He has commanded. In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah, and he chose the way of faithfulness by having the Torah on his heart, so that is the way to act in accordance with the grace of Jesus, not the way to choke it out, and that has always been the one and only way to become righteous by grace through faith. In 1 John 2:4, those who say that they know Jesus, but don't obey his commands are liars, and in 1 John 3:4-6, those who continue to practice sin in transgression of the Torah have neither seen nor known him, so we can't know Jesus instead of following God's instructions for how to know Him. God does not command manure, but rather the righteous deeds of the saints are like fine white linen (Revelation 19:8).

He's blatantly pulling Psalms 51:16-17 our of context because it goes on to say: 18 Do good to Zion in your good pleasure; build up the walls of Jerusalem; 19 then will you delight in right sacrifices, in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings then bulls will be offered on your altar.

 

[BABerean2]

Indeed, according to Ezekiel 36:26-27, the Spirit has the role of leading us to obey the Torah under the New Covenant in John 16:13, the Spirit has the role of leading us in truth, and in Psalms 119:142, the Torah is truth. I'm not part of the Hebrew Roots Movement, but you should be far more concerned with the danger of you opposing truth.

In Psalms 119:53, he said that hot indignation seizes him because of the wicked who forsake the Torah. God did not command to do evil in the Torah, but to do what is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), and Christ did not do evil when he set a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so it is completely absurd to think that the evil doers are those who are teaching people to obey what God has commanded in accordance with following Christ's example. In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is, so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which he prophesied would be proclaimed to all nations (Matthew 24:12-14), so it is again absurd to think that people are undermining the work of Christ by teaching people to obey the Torah that he taught by word and by example. In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Torah is the way to believe in everything that he accomplished through his ministry and through the cross, not the way to undermine his work or the way to say that what he did is not enough.

God is trustworthy, therefore the Torah is also trustworthy (Psalms 19:7), so relying on what God has instructed is the way to rely on God, not the way to rely on our own effort, while considering what God has instructed to be untrustworthy is also considering God to be untrustworthy. The Torah is God's word and Jesus is God's word made flesh, so it is contradictory for someone to want to put their faith in Jesus, but not put their faith in the Torah. In Romans 8:4-7, those who walk in the Spirit are contrasted with those who have minds set on the flesh, who are enemies of God, who refuse to submit to the Torah. In Galatians 5:19-23, everything listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Torah while all of the fruits of the Spirit are in accordance with it. The Torah is God's instructions for how to have faith, not the way to add our own effort on top of our faith.

In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah that he might know Him and Israel too, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so knowing God and Jesus is the goal of the Torah, which is eternal life (John 17:3) and righteousness for everyone who has faith (Romans 10:2-4). So Philippians 3 should not be interpreted as saying that the Torah is rubbish and we need to focus on knowing Jesus instead, but rather Paul had been obeying the Torah without being focused and knowing Jesus, so he had been missing the whole goal of the Torah, and that is what he counted as rubbish.

Jesus set a sinless example of how to walk in obedience to the Torah, so he was much more zealous for it than the Pharisees were, and he never criticized them for obeying it, but he did criticize them for not obeying it or for not obeying it correctly. For example, in Mark 7:6-9, Jesus said that the Pharisees were hypocrites for setting aside the commands of God in order to establish their own traditions. In Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that tithing was something that they ought to be doing while not neglecting weightier matters of the Torah of justice, mercy, and faith, so he was not coming against their obedience to the Torah, but rather he was calling them to a higher level of obedience to it in a manner that is in accordance with its weightier matters.

While we do not earn our righteousness by obeying God, that does not mean that we are not still obligated to obey what He has commanded. In Psalms 119:29-30, he wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Torah, and he chose the way of faithfulness by having the Torah on his heart, so that is the way to act in accordance with the grace of Jesus, not the way to choke it out, and that has always been the one and only way to become righteous by grace through faith. In 1 John 2:4, those who say that they know Jesus, but don't obey his commands are liars, and in 1 John 3:4-6, those who continue to practice sin in transgression of the Torah have neither seen nor known him, so we can't know Jesus instead of following God's instructions for how to know Him. God does not command manure, but rather the righteous deeds of the saints are like fine white linen (Revelation 19:8).

He's blatantly pulling Psalms 51:16-17 our of context because it goes on to say: 18 Do good to Zion in your good pleasure; build up the walls of Jerusalem; 19 then will you delight in right sacrifices, in burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings then bulls will be offered on your altar.

You are trying to ignore what Paul said in Galatians chapter 3, which reveals the temporary nature of the Sinai Covenant.

Paul said the law was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "till" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made.

Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.


Christ was born under the Sinai Covenant and then lived His whole life perfectly under the Sinai Covenant and died under the Sinai Covenant. He took all of the curses for us and all of the blessings for us. His blood also brought in a New Covenant, whose commandments are found below.

1Jn 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
1Jn 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1Jn 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

What does your Bible say in these same passages?


.

 

[Soyeong]

Certainly did and will do so again.

You have consistently ignored what I've said about Acts 15:10-11 and Acts 15:1 in spite of me repeatedly asking you to do that, so it is beyond me why you image that you've shown what I've said to be wrong.

You ignored the fact that what you emphasized also said "and to similar Gentiles, "whose flesh is as the flesh of asses and whose issue is like the issue of horses" (Ezek. xxiii. 20);" Check highlights in above. You continue to ignore the words of Jesus.

Both passages are speaking against Gentiles who are doing vile things including frequently raping Jewish women, not about Jews persecuting Gentiles. I did not ignore the words of Jesus.

I ignored nothing. Does NOT negate the fact that Jews were hostile to gentiles NOT just from specific locations see Ezek 23:20. above.

It has certainly been the case that there have been some Jews who were hostile to Gentiles, but that doesn't change the fact that what that quote out of context in order to show that Jews are hostile to Gentiles.

There were no synagogues populated by "Christian Jews" in the early centuries of the Christian church. I'm waiting for any kind of credible, verifiable, historical evidence that uncircumcised former pagan Christians, who were not Jewish proselytes, regularly attended synagogues with Torah observant Jews. The Jewish history I quoted certainly does not do so.

In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith who were all zealous for the Torah, so that for there to hundreds of synagogues populated by Christian Jews. It is bizarre that you think that tens of thousands of Jews are insufficient for them to join synagogues with like-minded believers or to form their own synagogues. In Acts 15:21, they expected tens Gentiles to continue to lear about Moses by hearing him taught every Sabbath in the synagogues, so that is credible, verifiable, and historical evidence. You've taken quotes out of context that don't show Jews as being hostile to Gentiles in context. Furthermore, even if your quote were in context, they would not establish universal and omnipresent hostility of Jews towards Gentiles from which there is nowhere that they could go to escape.

 

[Soyeong]

You are trying to ignore what Paul said in Galatians chapter 3, which reveals the temporary nature of the Sinai Covenant.

Sorry, I don't recall the video mentioning anything about Galatians 3, though it says nothing about the Mosaic Covenant having a temporary nature.

Exodus 31:14-17 You shall keep the Sabbath, because it is holy for you. Everyone who profanes it shall be put to death. Whoever does any work on it, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. 15 Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day shall be put to death. 16 Therefore the people of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, observing the Sabbath throughout their generations, as a covenant forever. 17 It is a sign forever between me and the people of Israel that in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.’”

Paul said the law was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "till" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made.

In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Torah was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which is in accordance with Jesus being sent in fulfillment of the promise to bless us by turning us from our wickedness, which is the Gospel that was made known in advance to Abraham in accordance with the promise (Galatians 3:8), which he spread to Gentiles living in Haran in accordance with the promise (Genesis 12:1-5). Christ did not go around telling people to stop repenting because the Torah has ended now that he has come, but just the opposite.

In Genesis 18:19, God knew Abraham that he would teaching his children and those of his household to walk in His way by doing righteousness and justice that the Lord may bring to him all that he has promised. In Genesis 26:4-5, God will multiply Abraham children as the stars in the heaven, to his children He would give all of these lands, and through his children all of the nations of the earth will be blessed because Abraham heard God's voice and guarded His charge, commandments, statutes, and laws. In Deuteronomy 30:16, if the children of Abraham will love God with all of their heart by walking in His way in obedience to His commandments, statutes, and laws, then they will live and multiply and God will bless them in the land that they go to possess. So the promise was made to Abraham and brought about because Abraham walked in God's way in obedience to His law, he taught his children to do that, and because his children did that in obedience to the Torah.

In Psalms 119:1-3, the Torah is how the children of Abraham knew how to be blessed by walking in His way, and in John 8:39, Jesus said that if they were children of Abraham, then they would be doing the same works as him, so the way that the children of Abraham are multiplied and are a blessing to the nations in accordance with inheriting the promise through faith is not by having physical dependents, but by turning the nations from their wickedness and by teaching the nations to do the same works as Abraham by walking in God's way in obedience to the Torah in accordance with spreading the Gospel.

Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

If the Mosaic Covenant were temporary, then that would nullify the promise, however Paul said that a later covenant does nullify the promises of a previous covenant, which completely undermines your position that the Mosaic Covenant has a temporary nature. Furthermore in Galatians 3:25-29, every aspect of being in children of God, in Christ, through faith, being children of Abraham, and heirs to the promise is directly connected to living in obedience to the Torah. In 1 John 3:4-10, those who do not practice righteousness in obedience to the Torah are not children of God, in Matthew 23:23, Jesus said that faith is one of the weightier matters of the Torah, in 1 John 2:6, those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked.

Christ was born under the Sinai Covenant and then lived His whole life perfectly under the Sinai Covenant and died under the Sinai Covenant. He took all of the curses for us and all of the blessings for us. His blood also brought in a New Covenant, whose commandments are found below.

Indeed, Christ set a perfect example of how to walk in obedience to the Torah under the Mosaic Covenant, and as his followers we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22), that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way he walked (1 John 2:6), and to be imitators of Paul as he is an imitator of Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1). Furthermore, John 12:46-50 does not give us any room to disregard anything that Jesus spent his ministry teaching, so he did not establish the New Covenant for the purpose of undermining everything that he spent his ministry teaching by word and by example, but rather the New Covenant still involves following the Torah (Jeremiah 31:33).

1Jn 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
1Jn 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1Jn 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.

What does your Bible say in these same passages?

In John 15:10, Jesus used a parallel statement to equate his commandments with those of the Father. If his commandments were not in accordance with those of the Father would mean that he was hypocritically practicing something other than what he preached and saying that we should do as he said, but not as he did. The Torah is God's word and the Son is God's word made flesh, so the Torah is God's instructions for how to believe in the name of His Son. It says that he that keeps Christ's commandments dwells in him, so that combined with 1 John 2:6 means that there is no difference between what he commanded and what he practiced.

 

[Der Alte]

You have consistently ignored what I've said about Acts 15:10-11 and Acts 15:1 in spite of me repeatedly asking you to do that, so it is beyond me why you image that you've shown what I've said to be wrong.
Both passages are speaking against Gentiles who are doing vile things including frequently raping Jewish women, not about Jews persecuting Gentiles. I did not ignore the words of Jesus.
It has certainly been the case that there have been some Jews who were hostile to Gentiles, but that doesn't change the fact that what that quote out of context in order to show that Jews are hostile to Gentiles.
In Acts 21:20, they were rejoicing that tens of thousands of Jews were coming to faith who were all zealous for the Torah, so that for there to hundreds of synagogues populated by Christian Jews. It is bizarre that you think that tens of thousands of Jews are insufficient for them to join synagogues with like-minded believers or to form their own synagogues. In Acts 15:21, they expected tens Gentiles to continue to lear about Moses by hearing him taught every Sabbath in the synagogues, so that is credible, verifiable, and historical evidence. You've taken quotes out of context that don't show Jews as being hostile to Gentiles in context. Furthermore, even if your quote were in context, they would not establish universal and omnipresent hostility of Jews towards Gentiles from which there is nowhere that they could go to escape.

Repeating your false accusation that I took something out-of-context does not prove the accusation. And you have not addressed the words of Jesus Himself about would happen to His followers in the synagogues. It certainly wasn't loving fellowship. Paul called circumcision and keeping the law a yoke that he and his Jewish contemporaries and their ancestors could not bear but he supposedly told gentiles Christians to attend Jewish synagogues where the only thing they would hear would be the law of Moses, certainly nothing about Jesus. How many books in the NT are addressed to synagogues?

 

[BABerean2]

being children of Abraham, and heirs to the promise is directly connected to living in obedience to the Torah.

The end of your statement above is correct, but you have never obeyed the Old Covenant Torah and you never will.

Only Jesus Christ obeyed the Torah.



Gal 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
Gal 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Gal 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?


.