Who believes this to be true: The Torah is not for Gentiles

yedida · Jan 7, 2012

talmidim said:
There is no copyright on His truth, Dear. It is your to with as you like with my full consent. All glory to Him, remember?

Thank you. It was very forthright and to the point. Didn't leave much for the ever-active imagination that wants to refute it, inho, anyway.

Gxg (G²) · Jan 7, 2012

talmidim said:
Shalom and Fair Greetings to my Brothers, Shimshon and Easy G, and to All Messianics in this Forum,

Shalom/Salutations to you as well

Easy G, having read your recent post to me, I find much that we agree upon.

Cool to know

The same is true of the posts you exchanged with my dear friend and brother Shimshon. So I took it upon myself to answer your conciliatory tone with action.

Technically, no one takes anything upon themselves here--as if there are favors being done for folks

But I understand you.

I have spent some time in study of the posts that gave as links in support of your position. In that I only had all night, I could not study, or for that matter even read them all!

No one will ever expect you to do so (i.e read them all). Again, they're for the sake of reference...as it's hard to give everything out in one instance when discussions have been around for a good bit when things were shared in the moment---and even then during those moments, no one has ever been required to get through every bit of it. Even I have limits on how much I can handle when reading from others and have to either take my time---or address one bit rather than the whole. Life sometimes happens and gets in the way..

That all said, thank you for taking the time to actually see what it was I've said

But I am confident that I got the gist of it. (I mean really G. You are an accomplished typist which is a great blessing! But you do go on and on.

Indeed, as do a handful of others I've noticed when they get passionate/in the mood. It's really subjective and I've actually found the same on some of the posts you give, but it really doesn't bother me since the detail/time is appreciated--even if it takes awhile to go through

.

Some of us appreciate, when appropriate, a 'bottom line' approach.

I agree...thus why I often try to do just that and appreciated the conversations with smaller postings.

However, within this post you made, I do hope you realize it really wasn't "bottom line"=--and I'm not bothered by that at all

Please don't be offended. This isn't a dig. I'm just saying...)

Didn't take it as a dig at all, as you were simply sharing your own perception of a situation, just as others have shared their own with one another on things shared. Each of us views things differently, based on our own experiences and how we're individually wired---and each of us are used to differing levels of content.

This is one of those places where I wish we still had the old ROFL smiley face.

I think we do...though if Christian FOrums got rid of it, I'm not certain as to why

So after some contemplation and consideration, this is what came to mind as an answer. (Please note: This really is kind of a 'bottom line' approach. You should see the study. )

I appreciate the time you took to give answer, although again, I'm not really seeing what you said as "bottom line" due to the extensiveness of it/explanation with detail. But it's all good, as the more detail (IMHO), the bette

---and I'd love to see the "Study" sometime if this is what the bottom line looks like ^_^

Your collective understanding seems to be that there are two separate covenants that are now available to join. The 'old' covenant of Moshe or Israel, and then the 'new' covenant of Y'shua. And in a way you are right!

To be clear, what I do believe is that the New Covenant builds around what the Covenant of Moses had---although within that building process (as other Messianics such as David H.Stern have noted), there is a re-prioritization of values/commandments and a lessening of others while others, due to being fulfilled, are not even considered.....and other parts of the New Covenant are actually reflective of what the Abrahamic/Adamic covenant were for. Ultimately, the New Covenant gives clarity to what all the other Covenants were about---and with our Covenant being based on what occurred in the Abrahamic covenant when it came to Melchizedek....in many ways, it's a round-a-bout journey.

But in another, even more important way, I believe you are in error. Please allow me to explain. And I would also ask that you would fully consider what I say here before you respond.

T, I don't have any problem considering fully what you have to say--just as it is with others (Proverbs 18:13, Proverbs 18:15, Proverbs 18:17). It is because of this that I take the time to read fully what's said and either verify it with what other Messianics have noted---or study it out myself. To be clear, however, I do put it out there that some of the things you shared (after reading it) are not necessarily things which are either new....or things which haven't been addressed in other discussions before. As it'd take way too long to have everything done collectively on that, I'll try to go through it simply...and What I also ask is that you consider what I or others have to say in response---and not think that disagreement equates to one seeking disobediance to scripture or disobediance to the Lord/dismissal of what you say

Ultimately, although we differ on many things, it's a blessing seeing where we intersect and I thank you for taking the time to share your views

I too see the difference of which you speak. But I do not agree that it is an 'either/or' choice. At least, not in the way you describe. The Only Creator made a covenant with man (Adam). He was given charge of everything and in exchange was directed not to partake of the fruit that contained the knowledge of evil. (Pretty sweet deal, huh?) But Adam did and we know the result. I've got a bulletin for you. That covenant still stands. Observe:

Covenant with Adam.

Covenant with Noah

Covenant with Abraham

Covenant with Moses

Covenant with David

Covenant with Y'shua

Covenant with All

The Father still does not want us partaking of evil and even though it happened with Adam, He promised a Seed to bruise the head of the serpent, the very personification of evil.

He cleansed the world of evil and through Noah promised not to flood it again.
He promised the Seed would come through the fruitful loins of Abraham, to bless all the families of the world.

He promised the Redeemer through the Mosaic covenant with Israel.
He promised the Redeemer to come through the House of David.
He promised the Redeemer sorrow, death, resurrection and the right to make a new covenant of life in His Name.
He promised life and salvation to ALL that would believe on His Son in obedience.

Every one of these covenants has common threads or themes that runs through them all:

Each one contains a promise of a Redeemer as well as other provisions.

Every one of these covenants is still in effect today.

Each one is progressive and stands upon the promises and provisions of the preceding ones.

Every one of these covenants has provisions that we, as covenant recipients, are responsible for today.

It should be noted, IMHO, that what the Lord did in creation is radically different from what He'll do in the end--if studying Revelation and other texts noting the reality of how the Lord is not simply trying to take us BACK to where we were in the garden with Adam's relationship (including the same rules/principales)---but is actually taking us Far beyond it into something far more glorious.

Additionally, with each of those covenants existing, the reality is that each of them have aspects you cannot walk in at this point (nor others) when it comes to seeing progressive development. The reality is that principles still remain from the Adamic covenant, even though we do not exactly have the same experiences/relationship Adam did with the Lord back in the garden. We understand the Abrahamic covenant even though the reality of the situation is you do not have allowances as they did in that covenant with marrying multiple women or sleeping with one's father (As what occurred with Judah and Tamar in making Perez). There is just as much of a pattern in seeing the development of things with not allowing certain things to occur.

Some of this was actually discussed more in-depth elsewhere recently in a thread concerning whether or not Adam/Eve were Jewish due to seeing some of the things they experienced being reflected in later coveants---and as said there for the sake of reference:

Easy G (G²);59482617 said:
I'm aware of the concept (known as Theosis) that Adam and Eve are not necessarily where man is heading back to....just as Creation itself is not going to be made into an exact replica of how things used to be when the New Heavens and New Earth come into being. Rather, the Lord is taking us beyond where they were into a more glorious state just as He'll do with the rest of transformation....and for those saying that Adam/Eve were technically in a process of glorification that was hindered by the enemy, many have said that Theosis is essentially a restoration of the transformation of man into something great--a finished product that was not fully seen in Adam/Eve even though they were made perfect/good. In many ways, Adam/Eve were a snapshot of the process the Lord intended for mankind---but it was not the fullness thereof.

PaladinValer said:

1. Theosis goes further - it is truly entering into a oneness of the Energies of God (not the SUBSTANCE, of course, or that would rob us of our "very good" creation as human beings, and that wouldn't make sense, not to mention it would be blasphemous) and eternally going deeper and deeper into that oneness without ever (!) losing our humanity.
2. I agree, entirely actually, with your statement that Adam and Eve were a "snapshot" of the process, especially when Jesus is prefigured as the Tree of Life.

Easy G (G²);59483005 said:

What you say is something I've had in mind for years, in regards to many of the things I've learned with Eastern Christianity....and I'm glad for many of the discussions I've been able to have with others in that realm as well as within Orthodoxy. It is cool to keep in mind the concept of theosis--and thankfully, it has been brought up often within the Protestant World as well like with people such as C.S Lewis ( as discussed here in #82 and here )

Click to expand...

Easy G (G²);59483005 said:

I remember reading something from my ESV Commentary/Study Bible--and one brilliant insight that stood out to me was the following with Genesis 4...for it gave clarity on how aspects of the Jewish culture were found originally within the beginning:

The sin of Adam and Eve would have tragic consequences that would become evident in their very own family. Indeed, the larger human family has repeatedly duplicated the dysfunctional dynamics that sin produced in the first human family. A thoughtful consideration of the story of Cain and Abel yields some interesting lessons.

Adam and Eve had two sons-Cain, the firstborn, and Abel. (They would also have other sons and daughters, too, as mentioned in Genesis 5:4. Yet they apparently had no other sons until the death of Abel, as Seth seems to be the next male child in line, compare v. 25). Cain, we are told, became a tiller of the ground, a farmer. Abel became a shepherd. As to the acceptance of Abel's offering and the rejection of Cain's, some have suggested that there was something wrong in Cain bringing a grain offering. Yet we later see grain offerings as perfectly acceptable to God. Indeed, God said the grain offering was to be burnt "on the altar for a sweet aroma, as a memorial to the Lord. It is most holy, like the sin offering and the trespass offering" (Leviticus 6:15, 17). So what was the problem? Genesis 4:4 tells us that Abel brought from the "firstlings" of his flock, but no such indication of giving God the first or best is attached to Cain's offering in the previous verse. Perhaps this was due to Cain's overall attitude. Verse 5 states, "But [God] did not respect Cain and his offering." Notice that it was not just the offering that God did not respect, but Cain himself! Indeed, that may be the very reason that God did not accept his offering. We are often told in Scripture that God loathes the sacrifices, festivals and even prayers of those who are guilty of great wrong and yet are unrepentant (see Isaiah 1:10-15). When such a person "offers a grain offering, [it is] as if he offers swine's blood" (Isaiah 66:3). God recognized that Cain was on the verge of allowing sin to control him (verse 7)-to manifest itself in real action.

We are told that Abel, on the other hand, offered a better sacrifice because it was offered by faith, through which he was considered righteous (Hebrews 11:4; Matthew 23:35). Faith comes by hearing God's instruction (Romans 10:17). God's commandments must have been transmitted through Adam and Eve. And God must have even prescribed rules for worship at some point, or else how would Cain and Abel have known to bring sacrifices? Abel was obedient-through faith.

Cain's rejection roused him to anger and jealousy-though he may have already had these emotions to some degree. In any event, he did not master his urges, as God told him to (verse 7). Instead, he murdered his brother. Later, God confronted Cain: "The voice of your brother's blood cries out to Me from the ground" (verse 10). When someone is said to cry out to God, the cries are usually for relief, protection or vengeance. Abel's blood, figuratively speaking, cried out for vengeance. This is confirmed by Cain's fear that vengeance would be taken out upon him by anyone who found him, and by God's remarks in verse 15, which explicitly connect vengeance with the context. This is interesting because the book of Hebrews states that the blood of Jesus "speaks better things than that of Abel" (Hebrews 12:24). Why? Because Abel's blood sought vengeance, which was well and just, but Christ's blood offers mercy and forgiveness to those who will accept it, which is better.

...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Continued in next post...

Gxg (G²) · Jan 7, 2012

As promised, the second part..

[/quote]Ac

talmidim
Acepting the promises made to Noah and his descendants does not abrogate our responsibility to reject the knowledge of evil any more than it nullifies the promise of the Redeemer to redeem us and bring us back to the garden.

Accepting the promises of the covenant of fruitfulness made to Abraham did not abrogate the promise of Noah to live in righteousness, walk in His ways and keep His commandments. Are you seeing a pattern here?

No one here would ever say such, as what the Lord calls as evil will always be evil---however, it's all centered upon what HE calls evil....and there has been differing standards in each generation. That can never be escaped. At some point early on in human development, people were allowed to marry their siblings/have sex with them---but later on, this was condemned by the Lord as EVIL. Some have said that the human race was genetically pure prior to Noah/others coming on the scene...and in-breeding became deadly once time caught up. Thus, what was allowed in one generation is not something that people should heed in the next--as the Mosaic code clarified how one sleeping with his sister or brother was an abomination.

Other things stayed consistent...but it was not across the wall. What matters is what the Lord says either changes, was meant to be temporary, was meant to be a memorial/lesson for other generations on what to do in similar situations...or what the Lord says was meant to be lasting.

If you doubt this assessment, please review the seven seals in the Revelation. Each covenant is sealed. So the seals in the Revelation are the judgements on those that have a broken covenant relationship with Him.

Each seal judgement is the antithesis of the promise of each covenant it represents. For instance: Notice the fourth one that represents the covenant of Israel given to Moshe. Torah points to and defines sin. The wages of sin is... (drum roll please) Death. THAT is what the letter of the Law (Torah) means. But it's promise is the Redeemer and Life for all those that keep it - in Faith, Love and Obedience!

IMHO, You would need to give serious scriptural reference of this to show that what was discussed in Revelation was a matter of COVENANT relationship with him being broken, as saying as you did seems to be reading far more into the text ofRevelation 5:4-6 / Revelation 6 that what's actually there. For many have interpreted the passage to simply mean judgements broken upon the earth after they were sealed up. Death happens to be the judgement that comes upon the world--but it is unwarranted claiming that it was representative of how the world didn't keep the Law of Moshe. Others without the Law of Moshe would also be subject to death in the absence of it (as Romans 2:6 notes with those without the law being judged based on what they know)---but it does not logically show that just because the Law of Moshe brought death for not keeping it means that all forms of death are a result of not keeping Mosaic COde.

Those not keeping the Adamaic Covenant or the Noahide Covenant would be subject to death as well---for as Romans 7 notes, being without the Lord and subject to whatever it is that He may ask will always produce death. For one to make anything close to the case you make, you would have to show from the Word/Torah that the Lord made clear it was only what He wrote down within the Mosaic Covenant that was to be the definition of what Torah was...and what He required for all generations...and it seems what one has to do is a bit of circular reasonining/begging the question to accomplish that.

What the NT makes clear, according to Paul and the other apostles (As SHimshon has often noted) is that not following the mininistry of the Spirit within us and being in communion with Christ is what brings death---and that trying to follow all aspects of the Mosaic Code bring death since a New Covenant has been opened up which makes it possible to do so much more than the Older one allowed.

When it comes to intent...

Anyway, I think what we actually disagree on is very small. You agree that we still should literally not commit adultery for instance, right? That's not legalistic in your sight is it?

Not at all, as Yeshua and the other apostles noted REPEATEDLY thaqt sexual immorality was something that stood for all time as an issue...and something which would always lead to death. No one is saying, to be clear, that certain thigns the Lord says will legally kill you will simply cease because Christ has come. If a man commits adultery, the consequences will still remain---and you'll have a world of hurt to deal with when it comes to pain/destruction. The same goes for grumbling.

All things within scripture are instructive for teaching us something today--and even Paul noted that when it came to showing how the ways people were destroyed for sin wasn't just for entertainment value:

1 Corinthians 10:7

Warnings From Israels History

1 For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. 2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. 3 They all ate the same spiritual food 4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ. 5 Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

6 Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did. 7 Do not be idolaters, as some of them were; as it is written: The people sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry.[a] 8 We should not commit sexual immorality, as some of them didand in one day twenty-three thousand of them died. 9 We should not test Christ, as some of them didand were killed by snakes. 10 And do not grumble, as some of them didand were killed by the destroying angel.

11 These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the culmination of the ages has come. 12 So, if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you dont fall! 13 No temptation[c has overtaken you except what is common to mankind. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted[] beyond what you can bear.

Hebrews 11 echoes the same reality...

I tend to think that ALL covenant provisions are legalistic by nature.

Think specific.

When Y'shus tells us that we are saved by the grace of the the Father, I take that in a very literal and legalistic fashion. When He tells us to love one another, I take that as very literal and legalistic too. Literal in terms of the context and intent of the statement. Legalistic in the sense that there are very real consequences to not following His example and His instruction in these matters. Remember, intent is a legal concept by nature.

Click to expand...

All covenants have rules and guidelines....something that no one will ever be able to escape from (more discussed here in #74 ).

Whatever the contract of salvation is for a certain group, that's what is expected. And it's not something which is a matter of "Well, whatever I want to do." Heard that often growing up in many circles, especially those who are Reformed/Calvinistic or believing in "Once Saved, Always Saved"--but I couldn't stand it--and thankfully, the church I attended in my youth was very big on understanding the terms of the covenant believers have with the Lord...and I'm thankful for other Messianics who've also shared on the issue (as seen here in #20 ).

You have based much of your position on the intent of the heart. I agree. If I don't murder you solely because I don't want to burn, then I grant your point. I have commited murder in my heart. But if my intent is not to murder you because I am attempting to love you even as He loves you - I still literally and legalistically don't get to murder you. There are still consequences if I do.

Click to expand...

Again, agreed 100% percent

You seem to be saying it's all about why.

Click to expand...

Actually, I'm also for the concept of the "What"--but just because one does something that is specified as not being allowed doesn't mean that they're solely in the clear..and on the same token, just because someone has good intentions/a positive "why" doesn't make the "what" allowable where the Lord has condemned it. More was shared on that here ( #5 )

There are some that take that to mean, "Well, I murdered him. It just happened. But I see that I was wrong and I repent. Forgive me?" My response would be, "Of course I forgive you. But you still murdered him. So you will still have to face the consequences. Book 'em Danno..."

Paul was very careful to remind us all, that we are adopted under the Covenant of Israel.

Everyone I know takes that to mean the Law of Moshe; Torah. The confusion came in when people tried to separate the Law of Moshe from the Traditions of the Pharisees and got it wrong.

Click to expand...

What I see of Paul clearly is that there's an establishment of physical Israel and Spiritual Israel--the one that was defined in Hebrews 11, Galatians 4 and Romans 11 when it comes to the remnant. I went in-depth with that here in #113, but what the text of scripture notes is how we have been grafted into Israel--and within that, there's still uniqueness. The Abrahamic covenant is also something Paul noted very plainly as the basis of adoption for the Gentiles since it was never limited to the Law of Moshe. On the issue, I greatly appreciate people such as Dr.Arnold Frutehchbam...as he did a good job laying it out, especially his series on the differing types of "Torah" that were given over the ages. And the work he has done within the Messianic movement has been stellar, IMHO. Of course, for others not the same in ideology as he is, it has been said before that he is not necessarily "Messianic"---but that is not the widespread view of all within Messianic Judaism as much as it can be with individuals/groups who do not deem Torah Observance differing from their own level of comfort as being "Christian."

Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum has spoken at the Messianic Fellowship I go to, as he was one of our key speakers for a Messianic conference we had years ago. For the sermons on what he shared, one can go here...

In Acts 15, when the Pharisees demanded that the gentiles undergo circumcision before they could walk in the ways of Torah, they were demanding that they convert to Judaism.

But the conversion that they were really demanding was not to Yah, but to the authority of the leaders of Israel. They were demanding that the gentile believers follow the traditions and customs of the leaders of Israel, before they could follow the instructions of Yah (Torah).

Click to expand...

[/quote]IMHO, One would have to show from the text of Acts 15 where the intention was for the Gentiles to walk in the ways of Moshe--as this is one of the areas I believe you to be in error. For it was not simply to the authority of the leaders of Israel that obediance was demanded---but to the very Mosaic Covenant itself that the Jews walked in. This has been addressed in-depth by many within the Messianic Jewish Alliance and other mainstream organizations when noting it was not the intention of the council for the Gentiles to ever follow all of the Mosaic Covenant---and even Peter noted in Acts 15 that it was a yoke they themselves could not bear. There's not room to re-share all of what I may think on it--but more was shared elsewhere here in #133

So to finally answer the poll question in detail, YES, the same Torah is for both Jews and Gentiles alike and Yes, there are different provisions for each group, just as there are different provisions for those that live in the land and do not. But the concept that those that are saved by faith in Y'shua are no longer responsible to the provisions of the covenant of Israel (Torah) is a dangerous rejection of the very Teacher that they claim to follow.

Never did Y'shua claim anything of the sort. In fact, He specifically warned against this very thing.

Click to expand...

Although I disagree with the last part of what you noted, as the Covenant of Israel was NEVER taught to all of those saved by faith for Gentiles, I agree with the rest of what you noted. There has always been distinction between Jew and Gentile...and never has it been the case that one was to become like the other in order to gain acceptance before the Lord.

The work of Jonah the prophet comes to mind when He (being the first Jewish missionary) went to Ninevah and preached to the enemies of the Lord to repent. Never was there any mention of the need for the Gentiles there to follow the Mosaic code in order to be saved---or for the Gentiles to become like them in order to have the Lord's favor...no more than it was for the Persian King, Cyrus, whom the Lord called his "anointed" one in the work He did for the Jews in bringing them back (Ezra 1).

Humbly Offered in His Love,
Phillip

Click to expand...

Many thanks for the offering, as I humbly offer what I have given in return....and wishing you the best Shalom..

visionary · Jan 7, 2012

Easy G (G²);59486424 said:
As promised, the second

Yahudim · Jan 7, 2012

visionary said:

I'm trying not to read too much into that...

visionary · Jan 7, 2012

talmidim said:
I'm trying not to read too much into that...

Yahudim · Jan 7, 2012

visionary said:

Gxg (G²) · Jan 7, 2012

Shimshon said:
He came testifying about himself, that he would die and be raised and be the one whom the Father is drawing all to, (what he did) so we can receive forgiveness of sins and raise us to eternal life. (what he will do)

There is your message bro. Gentiles and the Torah given through Moshe is not the message, nor are they bound together.

Yeshua and who he is, what he did and what he does and will do for us ARE the gospel message, and eternal life if we believe. Nothing else should be testified to. As it has no real substance to the life in Messiah we are called to live.

The pattern of holiness found in our Torah is lived out in reality through the Spirit. Trying to live out the pattern as if the Spirit lead you there is crazy.

On what you noted, although I've shared it elsewhere, I thought of saying here that the entire issue of saying one can keep the Torah often seems to go against what Moses seemed to say cleary in the same book mentioning that his law/Word was not far off that the people would actually fail in keeping it--as seen in Deuteronomy 31 when it came to his predicting Israel's rebellion.

As one Messianic Jewish ministry said best (in excerpt)--noted here in their article entitled Why did Moses write down the Torah? « The Rosh Pina Project ( #258 ):

From Moses words in Deuteronomy 31, it is clear that the Torah was not given to the people of Israel to make them feel better about themselves, but instead it was given as a witness against the people as evidence that they were law-breakers.

If as a Messianic Jew you still feel like you should base your identity upon the written words of the Torah, I would suggest that you havent fully felt the weight of these commandments upon your shoulders, and you havent accepted that these laws could only ever condemn you as a law-breaker.

Even if you were somehow able to observe the majority of the commandments, and thus make your boast in the written Torah, you still have to side-step Moses intention for writing down the Torah. The fact still remains that Moses wrote down the Torah as evidence that you are a sinner.

Moses says that if the people of Israel were not faithful to Torah when he was alive, how much less faithful will they be to Torah after his death?

As Messianic Jews, it is entirely right and proper to identify with the people of Israel. As bnei Israel, we must acknowledge that the Torah was given to us as evidence against us and not for us, because we are a sinful people.

The Torah is like a speed camera, or like police CCTV footage it only exists to catch you out.

As we are all caught out and condemned by the Torah, we should not declare ourselves to be Torah-keepers. Only Moshiach was able to keep Torah, and he kept Torah on our behalf, because of his grace and loving-kindness towards us.

If we can be faithful to Torah outside of Christ, then why did Moshiach take the penalty for breaking Torah upon his shoulders? Or, if we are now faithful to Torah as believers, then why does Moshiach continue to make intercession for us before the throne of God?

Moses uses a kol vchomer, to make his point. Therefore his argument also works in a reverse application...

If we understand the Prophet (Messiah) is like Moses, then it is clear: We are utterly corrupt when he (Messiah) is not with us (hes dead to us). Yet when we have Messiah (hes with us), how much less (reverse the kol vchomer) we are corrupt, and we WONT turn aside from the Way which He has commanded us. We may have Messiah and still be rebellious and stiff-necked, yet we wont turn aside from the Way, and evil wont befall us by provoking HaShem to anger as we wont be doing that which is evil in His sight, by the work of our hands.

After all it is within this same passage we read concerning the Torah:

Deuteronomy 32:46
he said unto them: Set your heart unto all the words wherewith I testify against you this day; that ye may charge your children therewith to observe to do all the words of this law.

Deuteronomy 32:47
For it is NO VAIN thing for you; because it is your life, and through this thing ye shall prolong your days upon the land, whither ye go over the Jordan to possess it.

The Torah is no vain thing, and it is our life (life now as well as eternal life) through which we prolong our days upon the land (the World to Come). For the Torah tells us to obey Messiah, to listen to his voice, and thus have our sins forgiven (Ex 23:20-21)

Exodus 23:20
Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the Way, and to bring thee into the place (temple mount, World to Come) which I have prepared. 21 Take heed of him, and hearken unto his voice; be not rebellious against him; for he will not pardon your transgression; for My name is in him

.

If we listen to Messiah, and are not rebellious against him, we will have our sins forgiven, and we will be kept on the Way, all the way to life and prolonged days in the land.

Torah then, serves to condemn the rebellious, and give eternal life to the one who listens and does not rebel against Messiah (for it is his merit that is credited to us and based on his righteousness alone do we receive his inheritance of eternal life as promised to him by the Torah).

....it would be foolish to disagree that we are not perfect when it comes to Torah keeping, yet Torah by design never intended us to be perfect or else it would not teach teshuvah repentance that leads eternal life, by the mercy of G-d, or sacrificial atonement in order that we may draw physically near to a holy G-d in these corrupt bodies and not get fried. We are called to judge ourselves in order that we may continue to be aware of the price Messiah paid for our redemption, and live who we are in the world to come, in the now and present of this world. As long as we are like Adam, just as he was when he was alive before he died, our bread, our obedience to Torah will only come by the sweat of our brow, and will be hindered by thorns and thistles.

Yet it is not impossible to obey the command love the L-rd your G-d at even the tiniest level, as we find that this leads to listening to and obeying Messiah, thus having our sins forgiven, and thus living forever in the World to Come with him based on his merit alone.

Yes Torah teaches us that we need mercy, and explains to us that G-d will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. I pray we all make teshuvah.

Psalm 119:97-104

97 Oh, how I love Your Torah!
It is my meditation all the day. .

Psalm 119 is a declaration of love of the Torah and its wisdom. The Torah causes rejoicing because it reveals what we are like.

Imagine if you went to the doctor, he ran some tests and he told you you had a life-threatening illness, and then offered you the antidote. You would be thankful to the doctor for running the tests, and grateful for whoever came up with the tests in the first place.

Its better to know youre sick and find a cure than to falsely believe youre well, and the Torah both reveals our maladies and reveals the Great Physician who can heal us.

If the Torah does cause us sorrow, then it is godly sorrow which leads to repentance, repentance which leads to forgiveness, forgiveness which leads to thankfulness, and thankfulness which leads to rejoicing

Its better to know youre sick and find a cure than to falsely believe youre well, and the Torah both reveals our maladies and reveals the Great Physician who can heal us.

If the Torah does cause us sorrow, then it is godly sorrow which leads to repentance, repentance which leads to forgiveness, forgiveness which leads to thankfulness, and thankfulness which leads to rejoicing.

For myself, when it comes to what Peter said about the Law being a Yoke that NO ONE could bear, I try not to make it out as if he couldn't of been mentioning "law" when the entire conversation seemed to be centered around not even trying to get the Gentiles to follow ALL of the Law at any point. I think its best to see that Peter was mentioning how expecting PERFECT Adherence to all aspects of the Law by our merit alone was never the way unto salvation since NO ONE could ever be expected to do that--and those who did so never did it by looking at themselves or their own righteousness. They looked onto the Lord, who ennabled them to be righteous through the system they had available. ...even though it wasn't necessarily the best God had in mind since much of it was temporary until Christ came as a BETTER means of dealing with the curse of sin/unrighteousness than the sacrifical system of atonement was.

Moreover, if one considers how many in scripture may've had messed up lives and yet in their simple faith the Lord justified them/counted them righteous, then one must note that it was never a matter about keeping every jot/tittle of the laws. Rahab the Prostitute would NEVER have known about all facets of the Torah, yet her faith in what little she knew about Israel's God was enough for the Lord to use her/justify her when it came to her saving the spies..as Joshua 2 and James 2 note. The same goes for Abraham, who was justified before keeping anything related to Law because of his faith in the Lord. Many others can be noted besides that, most notably the centurion in Luke 8 who had unlike any in all of Israel and who amazed the Lord.

Its obvious, IMHO, that anytime Torah is twisted, it can become a danger....but within that twisting, there's also the reality that Torah can become twisted when it leaves out the reality of what Christ came to promise----as it concerns differing dynamics that the Torah promised in relation to the new work of Christ...and certain parts of the OT never being intended to be binding for all time. If that wasn't the case, then neither Paul or Peter or James and the rest of the Jewish council would be correct in discussing the Blood of Jesus being shed and alerting others that forgivness needed to be attainted through Jesus that could not be found in adhering to the Torah alone ( Acts 5:30-32 , Acts 3:18-20 , Acts 11:17-19, Acts 20:20-22 , Acts 26:17-19 , Ephesians 1:6-8 , Colossians 1:13-15)

Acts 13:37-39
37 but He whom God raised up saw no corruption. 38 Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through this Man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins; 39 and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Acts 13:38-40/ Acts 13

For some good articles on the issue, one can go here:

The Great Debates: (Acts 15:1-41)

The Giving and Taking of Advice (Acts 21:1-40)

A Messianic Jewish Levite on the New ... - The Rosh Pina Project

Paul was very plain in expressing to the Gentiles he worked with how what was expected was simple walking in love.

Galatians 5:6
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

Romans 13:7-9, Romans 13 and Galatians 6:1-3 all echo the same theme...

There is, of course, the dynamic of how obediance to the Law played a part in showing what it took for one to truly have salvation.

Gxg (G²) · Jan 7, 2012

visionary said:

Back at ya

Gxg (G²) · Jan 7, 2012

Shimshon said:
The focus is Yeshua, who he is, what he did, and what he will do. None of that has to do with Jews or Gentiles observing the Torah given Moshe.
.

If interested, there's a wonderful book by Don Fito, entitled Your People Shall Be My People----and it's very well written in regards to discussing those who wish to have a Ruth-Like calling toward joining with the Jewish people for the sake of outreach/identification. Finto notedhow Gentiles were NOT to live as Jews...as seen here and here in his books....and I appreciate his heart for detail. If seeking to do evangelism amongs those who are Jewish and bless them, by all means...but to say evangelism is to be the same amongst the Gentiles as well doesn't seem right, IMHO.

Yahudim · Jan 7, 2012

Hi Easy G,

Did you see? I found it->

Anyway, I am encouraged that we agree on so much. I am not ignorant of the fact that some things have changed in the administration of Yah's righteousness over the course of time. I think it interesting to observe the 'what' and speculate as to the 'why'. But that is pretty much immaterial to our discussion here.

Most importantly, the majority of His message to His children has remained consistent throughout history though, agreed? Further, I cannot think of a thing that He has changed that hasn't specifically been for the benefit of the remnant of Adam in regard to their redemption. But again, this is just speculation.

As far as your assertion that some aspects of earlier covenants cannot be undertaken by us, I would agree. But my point in bringing them up is simply this. These are everlasting covenants declared and ratified by the Most High. The same can be said of Torah; requirement are everlasting, such as for the qualifications of the priesthood and the existence of the Temple as it relates to the mitzvahs of sacrifice. If those conditions change, the requirements are still in force. Sacrifice will again be required, even after the atoning sacrifice of Y'shua.

You don't see how the seven Seals of the Revelation line up with the seven covenants that I mentioned. I can understand that. But I assure you that they do. And I can show you how they also thematically align with the seven Appointed Times of Adonai and the seven Furnishing of the Tabernacle too. There are more 'sevens' that align with the covenants, most notably and prophetically, the seven days of creations.

There are four types of His children in scripture. There are two types of His covenant children and there are two types of His children that do not have a covenant relationship with Him. In the Revelation:

There are no judgements against those who have not broken covenant or who have been restored to a right relationship with Him. They are not appointed to wrath.
The Seals are judgements against those that have broken covenant.
The Trumpets are judgements against those have not chosen for either good of evil.
The Cups are judgements against those that have chosen for evil

Like I said before, it's a long study. Some of the people in this forum have seen bits and pieces of it. Perhaps I'll share it later.

You said:

IMHO, One would have to show from the text of Acts 15 where the intention was for the Gentiles to walk in the ways of Moshe--as this is one of the areas I believe you to be in error. For it was not simply to the authority of the leaders of Israel that obediance was demanded---but to the very Mosaic Covenant itself that the Jews walked in. This has been addressed in-depth by many within the Messianic Jewish Alliance and other mainstream organizations when noting it was not the intention of the council for the Gentiles to ever follow all of the Mosaic Covenant---and even Peter noted in Acts 15 that it was a yoke they themselves could not bear.

I can understand why you think I am in error considering your perspective. I don't fault you at all for that. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I believe with all of my heart that the yoke to which Peter referred was the burden Y'shua spoke of:

For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay on men's shoulders; but they will not move them with one of their fingers.

...speaking in this manner of the traditions of the Pharisees - the oral Torah - not the written Torah.

More to come later...

Blessings,

yedida · Jan 7, 2012

talmidim said:
Hi Easy G,

Did you see? I found it->

Anyway, I am encouraged that we agree on so much. I am not ignorant of the fact that some things have changed in the administration of Yah's righteousness over the course of time. I think it interesting to observe the 'what' and speculate as to the 'why'. But that is pretty much immaterial to our discussion here.

Most importantly, the majority of His message to His children has remained consistent throughout history though, agreed? Further, I cannot think of a thing that He has changed that hasn't specifically been for the benefit of the remnant of Adam in regard to their redemption. But again, this is just speculation.

As far as your assertion that some aspects of earlier covenants cannot be undertaken by us, I would agree. But my point in bringing them up is simply this. These are everlasting covenants declared and ratified by the Most High. The same can be said of Torah; requirement are everlasting, such as for the qualifications of the priesthood and the existence of the Temple as it relates to the mitzvahs of sacrifice. If those conditions change, the requirements are still in force. Sacrifice will again be required, even after the atoning sacrifice of Y'shua.

You don't see how the seven Seals of the Revelation line up with the seven covenants that I mentioned. I can understand that. But I assure you that they do. And I can show you how they also thematically align with the seven Appointed Times of Adonai and the seven Furnishing of the Tabernacle too. There are more 'sevens' that align with the covenants, most notably and prophetically, the seven days of creations.

There are four types of His children in scripture. There are two types of His covenant children and there are two types of His children that do not have a covenant relationship with Him. In the Revelation:

There are no judgements against those who have not broken covenant or who have been restored to a right relationship with Him. They are not appointed to wrath.

The Seals are judgements against those that have broken covenant.

The Trumpets are judgements against those have not chosen for either good of evil.

The Cups are judgements against those that have chosen for evil

Like I said before, it's a long study. Some of the people in this forum have seen bits and pieces of it. Perhaps I'll share it later.

You said:I can understand why you think I am in error considering your perspective. I don't fault you at all for that. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I believe with all of my heart that the yoke to which Peter referred was the burden Y'shua spoke of:...speaking in this manner of the traditions of the Pharisees - the oral Torah - not the written Torah.

More to come later...

Blessings,

Keep preaching it brother, perhaps somebody will hear and understand.

visionary · Jan 7, 2012

I would love a thread dedicated to this study...

it's a long study. Some of the people in this forum have seen bits and pieces of it. Perhaps I'll share it later.

visionary · Jan 7, 2012

Easy G (G²);59486702 said:
If interested, there's a wonderful book by Don Fito, entitled Your People Shall Be My People----and it's very well written in regards to discussing those who wish to have a Ruth-Like calling toward joining with the Jewish people for the sake of outreach/identification. Finto notedhow Gentiles were NOT to live as Jews...as seen here and here in his books....and I appreciate his heart for detail. If seeking to do evangelism amongs those who are Jewish and bless them, by all means...but to say evangelism is to be the same amongst the Gentiles as well doesn't seem right, IMHO.

On pg 55 of that book He did a very nice explanation of Romans 11 admonishing the Romans not to forget where they [Gentiles] get the covenant, the temple services, The Law, and the promises.. I say.. well then.. with this admonishment, shouldn't the Gentiles act like "they got it"

yedida · Jan 7, 2012

visionary said:
I would love a thread dedicated to this study...

If it's long, perhaps a sticky "to be continued" sort of thing? I too would like to read what he has learned. :clap:

mishkan · Jan 7, 2012

I'm intrigued by the 3:1 ratio of pro-Torah sentiment. That is roughly my own perspective, based on my interaction with the general Messianic population.

This is why I perceive the Hebrew-Christian perspective as a minority view that is dying out.

The new battle lines are now being drawn between Messianics that wish to exclude Gentiles versus those who wish to fully include Gentiles.

Shimshon · Jan 7, 2012

mishkan said:
This is why I perceive the Hebrew-Christian perspective as a minority view that is dying out.

The new battle lines are now being drawn between Messianics that wish to exclude Gentiles versus those who wish to fully include Gentiles.

This statement shows clearly then that you see yourself as part of a group that is usurping the existing established perspective. As in order for one to be dying out, it would mean that they lived at ruled one time or another. Nor would there be a need to draw 'new' battle lines within an existing establishment. Unless you are the usurper.

It quite clearly shows how one group is vying for majority within a group that it does not agree with. However it's not the Jews, but the Gentiles who battle for majority within an established group of Jews.

And if you had your way it seems you would eliminate all the Jews who established the movement to replace them with Gentiles who now imagine themselves as Jewish.

Battle way dear one...... It's not us your fighting. The Word you claim to understand and follow is proving you wrong by it's very existence.

Why is it that your definition of Messianic Judaism has to continually redefine the wheel in order to exist? Nothing is what it seems to your group. Nothing means what it states, but has to be deciphered through the MJ paradigm (that you have created) in order to be accepted.

Your even redefining the term Judaism at the exclusion of most the Jews here. As Gentiles, lead by the Spirit? :doh:

Yahudim · Jan 7, 2012

mishkan said:
I'm intrigued by the 3:1 ratio of pro-Torah sentiment. That is roughly my own perspective, based on my interaction with the general Messianic population.

This is why I perceive the Hebrew-Christian perspective as a minority view that is dying out.

The new battle lines are now being drawn between Messianics that wish to exclude Gentiles versus those who wish to fully include Gentiles.

I read the poll more as closer to 5:1 for those that actually fly the Messianic icon. But I am afraid you may have misread my intentions. Or perhaps I misread your meaning. I don't know.

I do not wish to do anything to gentile Messianics. I want an environment where the Torah observant Messianics can fellowship. I believe Messianic gentiles may have different requirements than Messianic Jews under Torah (I'm not an authority on this point), but the Torah observant are a completely different group from the 'faith and grace only' crowd or the Rabbinic Orthodoxy group. Tradition is not scripture, whether Christian or Jewish.

You know what the threads are like here. I have read some of your posts where you have spent a great deal of time meticulously defending scripture instead of sharing in the development of deep study in an environment of shared core beliefs. It is that distinction of which what I am a proponent.

To my way of thinking, if you are a believer in Messiah and not Torah observant, then whether Jew or gentile, you are not an adherent of Messianic Judaism. You are a Christian.

I feel pretty much the same way about Rabbinical Orthodoxy. If you follow the traditions of man over scripture, well I think you get my drift.

I am fine with fellowshipping with any group. They can ask questions here. I can ask question there. But I think the forum rules should reflect (and protect) the majority that makes up that group. A place where we can study and share without the constant onslaught of prolific detractors. That is my wish.

mishkan · Jan 7, 2012

Shimshon said:
This statement shows clearly then that you see yourself as part of a group that is usurping the existing established perspective.

Nope. I'm just a realistic observer of events.

Shimshon said:
As in order for one to be dying out, it would mean that they lived at ruled one time or another.

Indeed. That is the nature of life.

Shimshon said:
Nor would there be a need to draw 'new' battle lines within an existing establishment. Unless you are the usurper.

Whatever. I think you are unnecessarily argumentative.

Shimshon said:
It quite clearly shows how one group is vying for majority within a group that it does not agree with.

Vying? Perhaps. I see it as natural trends and developments.

Shimshon said:
However it's not the Jews, but the Gentiles who battle for majority within an established group of Jews.

Established group? Which established group?

Shimshon said:
And if you had your way it seems you would eliminate all the Jews who established the movement to replace them with Gentiles who now imagine themselves as Jewish.

That's just a ludicrous unfounded accusation.

Shimshon said:
Battle way dear one...... It's not us your fighting. The Word you claim to understand and follow is proving you wrong by it's very existence.

Again... whatever.

Shimshon said:
Why is it that your definition of Messianic Judaism has to continually redefine the wheel in order to exist? Nothing is what it seems to your group. Nothing means what it states, but has to be deciphered through the MJ paradigm (that you have created) in order to be accepted.

My definition? My definition hasn't changed substantially since 1981. As for differing paradigms, you betcha! Just like any group's understanding has to be viewed through its own paradigm. Again, you are unnecessarily antagonistic, pretending that Messianics are somehow distinctively responsible for some unnamed fault.

Shimshon said:
Your even redefining the term Judaism at the exclusion of most the Jews here. As Gentiles, lead by the Spirit?

You're going to have to explain that one to me. I've never redefined anything. I fully support Rabbi Dan Cohn-Sherbock's perspective that Messianic is nothing more than one more sect of Judaism.

Gxg (G²) · Jan 7, 2012

talmidim said:
Hi Easy G,

Did you see? I found it->

Anyway, I am encouraged that we agree on so much. I am not ignorant of the fact that some things have changed in the administration of Yah's righteousness over the course of time. I think it interesting to observe the 'what' and speculate as to the 'why'. But that is pretty much immaterial to our discussion here.

Hey, T (although if you prefer Talmidim as a reference, I'll say that instead

I glad to know where we agree on a number of things. On what you noted with the "What" and "why", I think it's not really consistent to say it's immaterial when much of the focus made in the threads is upon just that--as it concerns others calling out for seperation because of others not doing certain "Whats" and wanting to emphasize them more so than others...or discussing "whys"--whether that be you or others (myself included). No one here is really innocent of that--and as it concerns this discussion, IMHO, it's far from "immaterial" since it was disagreement with the "whats" and "whys" I gave to another that you chose to respond to

Most importantly, the majority of His message to His children has remained consistent throughout history though, agreed?

As that message is that man is sinful and needs a savior/someone to redeem him from his fate---and that Savior was Yeshua, who became one of us to redeem us---indeed that message hasn't changed.

Further, I cannot think of a thing that He has changed that hasn't specifically been for the benefit of the remnant of Adam in regard to their redemption. But again, this is just speculation.

Feeling ya....:

As far as your assertion that some aspects of earlier covenants cannot be undertaken by us, I would agree. But my point in bringing them up is simply this. These are everlasting covenants declared and ratified by the Most High. The same can be said of Torah; requirement are everlasting, such as for the qualifications of the priesthood and the existence of the Temple as it relates to the mitzvahs of sacrifice. If those conditions change, the requirements are still in force. Sacrifice will again be required, even after the atoning sacrifice of Y'shua.

Sacrifices, as it concerns atonment, are forever done with--and one has to read past a great deal of scripture, IMHO, to ignore the fact that what the Lord said of the requirements of one priesthood doesn't change what He felt about another priesthood and new requirements. No one can ever say that those not descended from the line of Aaron can inherit the Levitical Priesthood, as an example---nor can anyone say that they can keep the entire Mosaic Code only by adhering to one aspect of it since the Law required it ALL to be kept if one was going to claim righteousness by it in proclaiming they were justified by it. Nonetheless, those things still stand eternal while it is also equally eternal that the Melchizedek Priesthood (existing prior to the Mosaic Code, Genesis 14 and Hebrews 5-7) is what Yeshya came in and what we base our covenant with the Lord in---and it's just as eternal that Yeshua walked out the fullness of the Mosaic Code in order to enable access into a New Priesthood/Covenant that didn't require one walking in accordance with a previous Mosaic Priesthood or Mosaic code. It's just as eternal of a precept/command by the Lord that looking unto the Mosaic code for justification and righteousness can only bring a curse since He made clear it was only in looking unto the Spotless Lamb/Sacrifice of Christ and His example that one was truly made righteous.

With the sacrifices, to be clear, I agree that the Levitical priesthood will be reinstated--though I also feel that the recreation of the Levitical priesthood will be for a time...till the time when there's no more moon or sun due to God's Glory/light shining in its place (Revelation 21-22).

To be more clear on what I'm saying, the Lord almighty said the following:

"Jer 33:17
For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel; 18 Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually. 19 ¶ And the Word of the LORD came unto Jeremiah, saying, 20 Thus saith the LORD; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season; 21 [Then] may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests, my ministers.

There is still day and night. ..and others are of the mindset that day/night existing must mean that the Levitical priesthood is still up/running and what the Lord wants His saints to run to. However, there's already the dynamic of how NIGHT and Day have limitations in their extension since the Lord already promised that those things would cease as well in the age to come....and if focusing upon Jeremiah 33 in its talk of "day and night" being the basis for the Levitical priesthood continuning, Revelation makes a difference:

Revelation 22:4-6

4 They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5 There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.

One of my favorite Messianic Jewish leaders I follow---known as Hazakim---actually made an EXCELLENT song on the issue that one can find online...if going/looking up the song entitled the following:

"Shamayim of Gold-Hazakim - YouTube" ]

In light of how the Bible says that Sun/Night will cease seeing that the Lord will replace both for His saints, if that can come to an end and transformation can occur, there's logical basis for saying that there will be a transformation of what the Levitical priesthood will be later....as opposed to assuming it will continue to work the same JUST as it operated within the OT..

As said on differing occassions, some branches of Christianity teach that the ethical Law remains, while the civil/ceremonial statutes have been done away with.

For Gentiles, this may seem a satisfactory solution to the problem of Torah...but for Jewish believers it isn't so simple as that....all supposed abrogations can be otherwise explained within the Jewish framework for understanding Torah.

Some rules were transformed by their fulfillment...a process already found in the Tanak, for example, when the Tabernacle was superceded by the Temple. In the New Testament, Yeshua's own sacrifical death fulfilled the function of temple sacrifice foe sin and either superceded it or changed it into a memorial...as explained in Hebrews 7:11-13 .

It makes sense to consider how Levitical sacrifices will continue ONLY in a memorial sense due to the fact that our current observation of the Lord’s Supper includes this aspect (1 Corinthians 11:23-26). Under the Mosaic system — which looked ahead — many times various temple sacrifices are specifically called “memorials” (Exodus 30:16; Leviticus 2:2, 9; 5:12; 6:15; 24:7; Numbers 5:15, 18, 26). For those saying that a temple must remain for ALL time, it should be remembered that the millennium will return history to a time when Israel will be God’s mediatory people but will also continue to be a time in which sin will be present upon the earth. Thus, God will include a new temple, a new priesthood, a new law, etc., at this future time because He will be present in Israel and still desires to teach that holiness is required to approach Him. This is contrasted with the fact that no temple will exist in eternity (Revelation 21:22) because God and the Lamb are the temple since there will be no sin in heaven, thus no need for ritual cleansing.

Hebrews 10:4 says, “It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.” .....and there would have been no need for Christ’s once and for all atoning sacrifice if these past acts with the Levitical system did the job. Thus, for the Levitical priesthood/system, its logical to realize that it can only continue in a secondary level/differing dynamic than how it once once....and trying to quote Jeremiah 33 as a case for the Levitical system to continue as it operated DURING THAT TIME would be erroneous.

Scripture makes clear that the Law has transformed..especially within the area of the Temple. One must keep the concept of transformation in view if discussing the Temple in the OT and what the NEW Covenant describes for us...as well as all of the activities occuring in the old temple that occur for us as well differently in the new.

When it comes to what God said with Moses when it came to his commanding the Israelities to give sacrifices to Him..animal ones as well as grain ones, it should be understood that the sacrifices have changed, of course, in the NT (Romans 12:1-3, Hebrews 13:15)--just as it has been with the temple changing in its format.....though of course, some say that the temple will come back according to Ezekiel 39-44 and Zechariah 6....and that's worth considering.

In Hebrews 13:8, for example, the sacrifices were considered to be "praise" we give to the Lord---in remembrance of Leviticus 7:12 and Psalm 50:14 and what the scriptures say in I Peter 2:5 about us now being priests/God's new design (temple included)...and in context with the Book, the Jews following Christ were being persecuted at one point due to their faith and distancing from aspects in Judaism.

If these Jewish Christians, because of their witness to the Messiah, could no longer worship with other Jews, they could consider praise their sacrifice----one they could offer anywhere and anytime. This must have reminded them of the prophet Hosea's words, "Take away all of their inquity and recieve us graciously so we will render the calvesof our lips" (Hosea 14:2).

A sacrifice of praise today would include thanking CHrist for His sacrifice on the Cross and telling others about it....and as Paul mentioned in Romans 12:1-3, our lives are now to be a living sacrifice. These Christians could now be encouraged in their Jewishness, despite how Hebrews 10:32-39 describes the massive persecution that the Hebraic Christians were facing ...

Other sacrificial offerings remain part of God's order even after Yeshua's death, as proven by Sha'ul's activity in the temple at Acts 21:25-27 and his own offering of sacrifices which he himself speaks of at Acts 24:16-18 .

With the destruction of the temple, sacrifical offerings became impossible; but if the temple is rebuilt, thank offerings, meal offerings, and praise offerings may be offered once again. What has ended in many ways isn't the sacrifical system since many things occurring in it were not only practiced by the early church----but they were also done before the Law in examples such as Cain and Abel in giving grain offerings and animal sacrifices out of thankfulness.

In regards to Leviticus, I'm of the mindset that the last days will see the sacrifices done in a memorial sense more so than actually making cleansing for the sins of the people---as the blood of Jesus was explictly for that purpose. I think it'd be best to see that when Messiah returns in glory, He will build the millennial Temple (Ezek. 40-48)..and it will be filled with the Divine Presence (Ezek. 43:1-7) and will be consecrated for use throughout the Messianic age (Ezek. 43:11, 18-27; 44:11-28; 45:13-46; Isa. 56:6-7; 60:7; Jer. 33:18; Zech. 14:16-21). When the temple is rebuilt it is expected that the sacrificial system will be re-instituted...but since the blood of the Messiah (the permanent sacrificial lamb) is the blood that God uses for the atonement process, the sacrifices are thought to be some type of memorial to what was accomplished on the cross, similar in some ways to a communion memorial.

Jeremiah 33:14-2 is a prose of salvation, which is an expansion of Jeremiah 23:5-6. Coming from the exile, it promises the restoration of the Davidic monarchy and the Levitical priesthood. God's promises to David and the Levites will be honored (Deuteronomy 18:1-2, II Samuel 7). In many ways, what is said of the Levitical priesthood is a repetition of the promise made to Phinehas in Numbers 25:13. Some understand this of a continuance of Gospel ministers unto the end of the world, who succeeded the priests and Levites (I Peter 2:1-10)--for the NT describes how the people of God now have the honorific titles taken from Exodus 19:6 and Isaiah 43:20-21 applied to them as now being "kings and priests." What in the OT describes aspects of Israel is here applied to the Christian community......

Essentially, the Messiah's literal priesthood (Heb 7:17, Hebrews 7:21, Hebrews 7: 24-28), and His followers' spiritual priesthood and sacrifices (Jer 33:11, Ro 12:1, Romans 15:16, I Peter 2:5-9, Revelation 1:6), shall never cease, according to the covenant with Levi, broken by the priests, but fulfilled by Messiah (Nu 25:12-13; Malachi 2:4, Malachi 2:5-8).

Who believes this to be true: The Torah is not for Gentiles

I believe the Torah is NOT for Gentiles

yes Torah is not for Gentiles

no Torah is for anyone

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Ruth Messianic, joining Israel, Na'aseh v'nishma!

There's room for YOU in the Mishkan!

Well-Known Member

Y'shua HaMoshiach Messianic

There's room for YOU in the Mishkan!

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)

Similar threads