Messianics and Dispensationalism

talmidim said:

Just as an informational post. After the Temple was destroyed, the priests continued making sacrifices at that location upon the bare rock; as it was the location that was specified in scripture, not the building.

Click to expand...

But today there is something else standing at that location so the sacrifices cannot be performed as commanded. Someday soon.....

Hoshiyya said:

Not so sure about that myself - - -

but like I say, and like the first question in this thread seems to suspect, it seems ultimately all Messianics are to whatever degree dispensational. God certainly has the right to abrogate as he pleases, though it may or may not put us in a difficult position to defend sometimes.

Click to expand...

Which ones did He abrogate? Please give the scriptural references so we can check them ourselves. These are things we need to know.....

talmidim said:

Just as an informational post. After the Temple was destroyed, the priests continued making sacrifices at that location upon the bare rock; as it was the location that was specified in scripture, not the building.

Click to expand...

Scripture please.

annier said:

Scripture please.

Click to expand...

That is historical info...

yedida said:

Which ones did He abrogate? Please give the scriptural references so we can check them ourselves. These are things we need to know.....

Click to expand...

I don't claim to be an authority I'm just saying he's God and can do what he wants. (In Kings or Samuel it does appear David changed the age requirements of priests, but this could be something he did and not something God commanded, I guess. I can try to find the reference if you wish ?)

It nevertheless was claimed in this very thread that Adam kept laws different from those we're commanded to keep, which I find interesting.

Perhaps relatedly, and as recently mentioned: in Revelation, it says there will come a time when there's no more temple (this is talking about a time AFTER the 3rd temple mentioned by Ezekiel, which will stand functional during the Millennial kingdom.)

yedida said:

Which ones did He abrogate? Please give the scriptural references so we can check them ourselves. These are things we need to know.....

Click to expand...

Heb 7:16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.

Heb 7:18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

annier said:

Scripture please.

Click to expand...

Of course.

Deu 12:5 כי אם־אל־המקום אשׁר־יבחר יהוה אלהיכם מכל־שׁבטיכם לשׂום את־שׁמו שׁם לשׁכנו תדרשׁו ובאת שׁמה׃
But unto the place which the LORD your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put His name there, even unto His habitation shall ye seek, and thither thou shalt come;

Deu 12:6 והבאתם שׁמה עלתיכם וזבחיכם ואת מעשׂרתיכם ואת תרומת ידכם ונדריכם ונדבתיכם ובכרת בקרכם וצאנכם׃
and thither ye shall bring your burnt-offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and the offering of your hand, and your vows, and your freewill-offerings, and the firstlings of your herd and of your flock;

Click to expand...

intojoy said:

Well the laws Adam had differ from Noah, at least capital punishment and the eating of animals. Laws of God appear to change according to His timing throughout the historical record of the bible do they not?

Hoshiyya said:

Not so sure about that myself - - -

but like I say, and like the first question in this thread seems to suspect, it seems ultimately all Messianics are to whatever degree dispensational. God certainly has the right to abrogate as he pleases, though it may or may not put us in a difficult position to defend sometimes.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I like what was said in previous discussion (more discussed here and here/here, here , here, here and here )- as seen here:
And on the Law of Christ, in the Epistle to the Galatians, written by Paul of Tarsus to a number of early Christian communities in the Roman province of Galatia in central Anatolia, he wrote: "Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." (Galatians 6:2). Most have noted this to be an allusion either to the Second greatest commandment ("love thy neighbor") or the New Commandment ("love one another"). There's also 1 Corinthians 9:20-22 / 1 Corinthians 9 - more by Derek Lemnan at “The Law of Christ” | Messianic Jewish Musings

When studying the Scriptures, there do seem to be clear signs/indications of progession of thought when/if it comes to the Law and seeing differing applications. For many it has always been an issue of attempting to do what can be done - as opposed to focusing (as others have noted) on what you or I were specifically given to due according to Christ /the example of the early Body of Believers who had a New Covenant/Brit Chadasha and moving from there - for we are not to start in the Torah, find whatever they did and then say "That is what happened then and it will be that way forever" - but rather, as the Early Jewish body of believers did, we are to see what the Lord instructs to do in the example of Yeshua...and then go from there. It's not a lack of appreciation for the Law to see it as such - but rather, it's a matter of finding out how to apply it properly...and regardless of where we all stand, the reality is ultimately on how we can live our lives to the Glory of God. Messianic Jew/Rabbi Asher Intrater did a wonderful job of seeking to cover that in his series "Living to Honor God"



For in everything that we do, it should be on living to glorify Him on a minute-to-minute basis. And Instead of questioning every circumstance, we are simply to ask, "How can I bring glory to God?" regardless of the situation ( 1 Corinthians 10:30- ), and in doing so, live a life of faith.
But with the Law itself, as it concerns application, the Law of Christ/Law of Love are what take precedence:









Many of the 613 commandments do not apply to everyone, but Christ and John in Rev 22 specified the "Big Ten" - the "Ten Things" - the Ten Commandments - do apply to everyone. And ultimately, what the focus comes down to is love for one another as fulfilling all things. The Messianic Jewish Brothers/Sisters over at the Rosh Pina Project noted it best before in their series on Love and the Law. ..and I've noted this on a number of occassions ( #93 #138 , #182 and #183 ). what He required - based EXPLICLTY on what Yeshua noted and the apostles - is to love one another. That is what He gave us, in agreement with what the Lord was seeking to bring into focus many times with His Covenant. And His covenant is with other elements now that we have HIS Spirit.

1 John 3:13-15
​

We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers. Anyone who does not love remains in death.

1 John 4:20
​

If anyone says, “I love God,” yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. And he has given us this command: Whoever loves God must also love his brother.
​

1 John 3
​

​

Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness. 5 But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin.
​

Messianic Jew Asher Intrater said best - as seen in Revive Israel: Torah and New Covenant

If one isn't committed to doing love for neighbors, they're really not commited to doing things in the interpretation of Covenant that Yeshua required. It is what it is.


Apostle John was very direct on it and spoke in no uncertain terms

John 13:34-35
​

“A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

John 15:8-18
​

This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples.
9 “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. 10 If you obey my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have obeyed my Father’s commands and remain in his love. 11 I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete. 12 My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. 13 Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. 14 You are my friends if you do what I command.15 I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. 16 You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit—fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. 17 This is my command: Love each other.


Romans 13:8
[ Love, for the Day Is Near ] Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. The commandments, “Do not commit adultery,” “Do not murder,” “Do not steal,” “Do not covet,”[] and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”[b 10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

​

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.

James 2:8
​

​

8If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, “Love your neighbor as yourself,”[] you are doing right.9
​

Oh please Mister. Can you tell me where I can find a copy of this wonderful book, 'The Law of Christ'; the foundation of this wonderful new dispensation? Or is it just a literary device used to illustrate a point?

visionary said:

That is historical info...

Click to expand...

I know it is. Not all things done historically mean they are scripturally supported or right though.

talmidim said:

Of course.

Click to expand...

I am not seeing in your scripture quotes, where this place, is the only thing mentioned for these offerings to be made sacrifices by the priests? I asked about the sacrifices of the priests which you mentioned

I do see this however.
Le 3:13 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of it, and kill it before the tabernacle of the congregation: and the sons of Aaron shall sprinkle the blood thereof upon the altar round about.
Le 4:6 And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the LORD, before the vail of the sanctuary.
Le 4:17 And the priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before the LORD, even before the vail.
Le 16:14 And he shall take of the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it with his finger upon the mercy seat eastward; and before the mercy seat shall he sprinkle of the blood with his finger seven times.
Le 16:15 Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the vail, and do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the mercy seat, and before the mercy seat:

Le 17:5 To the end that the children of Israel may bring their sacrifices, which they offer in the open field, even that they may bring them unto the LORD, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest, and offer them for peace offerings unto the LORD.

Hoshiyya said:

How can the law be added? Did not Adam keep it, long before Abraham was born? Did he not, in fact, keep it until he kept it no more, and was exiled from the garden?

Click to expand...

With Adam, there does seem to be a concept of previews in the actions he does - things mentioned in the Mosaic - and what we do now in the New Covenant.

Sacrifices immediately come to mind...for all sacrifices were meant to point to Christ as the ultimate sacrifice...
With sacrifices, it seems that the means by which they occurred within the OT do not apply in the same way as they do in the New Covenant. The sacrifices of the Lord are now our own bodies----whereas the animal sacrifices only pointed to what Christ was going to do and what it is that He desires of us.
One would be in error, IMHO, saying that any kind of animal sacrifice (if done in a memorial of what the Lord had done) had to be done in the manner that the Mosaic Law outlined since that era has ended....and it was transformed.

On the part concerning burnt offerings/sacrifices, Jesus noted this to a degree during his earthly ministry. For why else did Jesus note in HIS OWN Time (Matthew 9:9-13, Mark 2:13-17, Luke 5:27-32) when it came to his quoting what the scriptures say on Sacrifices in Psalm 51:16-19...in line with I Samuel 15:22-23..when it came His making clear that what God desired was Mercy and NOT Sacrifice? Christ was very radical to choose someone such as Matthew the Tax Collector as one of his disciples....seeing how well known they were for being corrupt/wild in their living....and when Jesus visited Matthew, at the cost of making connections, Jesus hurt his own reputation at first. The Pharisees tried to question Christ by saying he could never be a righteous man by choosing to associate with such immoral people....and yet, Jesus made clear that they were off since they were more concerned with their own OUTER appearance of holiness than with helping people, with criticism than encouraging, with outward respectability than practical help.

Jesus made clear that God was concerned for all people --including sinful and hurting ones (counter to how many of the Jews often acted when making sacrifices and yet mistreating Gentiles)....and Jesus made clear that God was more concerned with the Heart. More than outward appearance, God wanted inward REPENTENCE. Its the reason why Jesus quoted Psalm 51:16-17 when it came to the Psalmists ---in a time of GREAT SIN---made clear that the expression of a sacrifice didn't matter if the heart was not contrite and broken.

Jesus also made certain that he quoted Hosea 6:6 --in line with what the Prophet Isaiah said to Israel in Isaiah 1:1---that sacrifces alone were never God's heart since God desired MERCY and not sacrifice. The prophet Hosea began his ministry during the end of the prosperous but morally declining reigh of Jeroboan II of Israel---prophesing until shortly after the fall of Samaria in 722 B.C (II Kings 17). His role was to show the northern kingdom how unfaithful they had been to God, their "husband" and "provider" and had married themselves to Baal and the gods of Cananna.

The way the people made sacrifices to false gods and tried to appease God with more sacrifices to him would be like a man finding out his wife had an affair---and then having the wife try to cook breakfast/dinner more or go on dates with her husband and give more sex. The other activities would be meaningless if she continued having an affair---or thought that her husaband wanted more and yet she didn't love Him...and Hosea tried to make clear that a religious ritual is only helpful if it is carried out with an attitude of love/ obediance for God....BUT if not having those elements, it will be simply mockery of God. God didn't want the Israelities' rituals as mucha s their hearts....
As Isaiah said,
The context of Isaiah's words makes sense in light of how he lived in idolatrous Israel...a prophet during the time when the original nation of Israel had been divided into two kingdoms---Israel in the north and Judah in the South. The entire chapter of Isaiah 1 goes into great detail discussing how God was unhappy with his people....and as Isaiah 1 makes clear, God was unhappy with thier sacrifices while not revoking the system of sacrifices he had initiated with Moeses. Instead, God was calling for sincerefaith and devotion. For as said before, the leaders were carefully making the traditional sacrifices/offerings at Holy Celebrations but still remaining unfaithful to God in their hearts. For sacrifices were to be an OUTWARD sign of their INWARD Faith in God...but outward signs became empty because not inward faith existed. The people continued to offer sacrifices because they had come to place more faith in the rituals of their religion than in the God they worshipped.

One can find more on sacrifices via what Isaiah said in Isaiah 19:20-22, Isaiah 43:23-25, Isaiah 65:6-8, and Isaiah 66:2-4

Ezekiel is another good one, as seen in Ezekiel 20:27-29 , Ezekiel 20:39-41 and Ezekiel 44:14-16, Ezekiel 46:23-24.

And with Jeremiah, one can find more on what he was discussing fully with Sacrifices in Jeremiah 6:19-21 , Jeremiah 17:25-27 ,


God often made clear that sacrifices for its own sake were never appropriate if they were done in an end of themselves---for at that point, one would be lacking a broken/contrite heart in the process (God's Goal) and all one would be doing is ritualism. Its why the Jews were caught off guard before the exile--as they thought they were doing everything right and yet God was not in it.


Adam's sons were raised in the adominition of the Lord---and as God required/made clear, they were to offer up to Him. . Cain and Abel had constrasting occupations/differing kinds of offering to God----both being what God commanded since both offerings are recognizable parts of the later Levitical system: for Cain's offering of the fruit of the ground is in Deuteronomy 26:2 (an offering expressing consecration), and for Abel's offering of the firstborn of his flock, that can be found in Deuteronomy 15:19-23 (a kind of peace offering, a meal in God's prescence). At no point does the Bible suggest that offering work automatically...as if the worshipper's faith and contrition did not matter. For as the Torah makes clear, God desires BROKENESS/Willful humility in order for us to come to Him.....
This is a teaching throughout the scriptures----especially as it relates to how often God said he RESISTED the proud---but gave grace to the Humble ( Numbers 12:2-4 , 2 Samuel 22:27-29 , 1 Kings 21:28-29, 2 Kings 22:18-20, 2 Chronicles 12:6-8 , Psalm 18:26-28, Psalm 25:8-10, Psalm 149:3-5, Proverbs 3:34, Isaiah 66:1-3, Luke 18:13-15, James 4:5-7 , 1 Peter 5:4-6, etc )


And with Cain's fundamentally bad heart, this can be seen in his resentment toward his brother and in his uncoopertative answers to God in the rest of the pasage in Genesis 4. He chose not to love God...or His neighbor. Cain demonstrated an evil heart by his wicked deeds, whereas Abel demonstated a pious heart by his righteous deeds---and His wholeheartely doing as God commanded. That Abel offered his sacrifice by faith and was COMMENDED as righteous for that reason, cannot be ignored. As the Word says in Genesis 4:1-12, Matthew 23:35, Hebrews 11:4, and 1 John 3:11-13

To focus on the sacrifice itself and not on the heart being transformed---as the New Covenant focuses upon--may miss the point.

And on the issue, it was mentioned earlier how Stephenspoke in-depth on sacrifices and what the Lord viewed on with temples in Acts 6-7 - many no longer had an ideology that sacrifices had to be made solely within the Temple system during their day. And the same is said as it pertains to gathering ( #4/#21/ #23 /#29 #39 ) - in light of the example of the Lord when he lived and the variety of places he operated. It's why the early body of believers could spread as far as they did - and see the Lord do amazing things. They were prepared to adapt and see a differing form of application.

Hoshiyya said:

People mix up millennial (3rd temple, perfect form of this world) and post-millennial (new heavens and new earth, no temple, New Jerusalem) all the time . . . many are insulted or alienated by the very idea of these being two separate future ages. Especially Amillennialists

Click to expand...

Eschatology makes a world of difference as it concerns the reasons why others choose the views they do.

For myself, where I grew up, the text of Revelation was always seen as the main text to go by when it came to eschatology - in addition to the scriptures in Ezekiel and others on the temple. Things with Revelation seemed to become more of a focus during the days of books such as "Left Behind" book series and others feeling like they were going to be taken out. And how the reign of Christ over the unjust occurs always seems to shift based on what camp one is from. Some of the differing views in existence when it comes to eschatology - such as Amillennialism - are interesting when it comes to how it sees the reign of Christ in the end......especially from the perspective of other camps present today (as with IHOP and Neo-Charismatic circles that got their evolutionary development from Third Wave groups).

Amillennialism Beliefs in general:

• The New Testament church becomes the Israel of God (Gal.6:16).
• Satan was bound during Jesus' earthly ministry, restraining him while the gospel is being preached in the world (Mt. 12:29; Lk. 10:18, 19).
• The Kingdom of God is a present reality as the victorious Christ is now ruling His people by His Word and Spirit (Lk. 17:20, 21).
• The Kingdom of God is essentially redemptive and spiritual in character rather than political and physical (Jn. 18:36).
• The millennium (and the "first resurrection") in Rev. 20:4-6 describes the present reign of the souls of deceased believers with Christ in heaven (Hoekma).
• The millennium is the period between the two comings of Christ, or, more strictly, between the return of the ascended Son to glory, his mission to earth completed, and the loosing of Satan 'for a little while' (Hughes).
• In contrast to postmillennialism, amillennialists do not believe that the Scripture predicts a golden age in the world prior to Christ's return.
• There will be a progressive maturation of the forces of, both, good and evil (Mt. 13:24-30, 37-43, 47-50). (agrees with premillennialism)
• A time of great apostasy will be experienced immediately prior to Christ's return (Rev. 20:7, 8).
• Some amillennialists believe the apostasy will be led by "the Antichrist", while other amillennialists, noting that the word "Antichrist" fails to occur in Revelation, believe that the "Beast" of Revelation was a contemporary of John's day (Rev. 13:11-18).
• Although the kingdom of God is a present reality, Amillennialists also look forward to a future, glorious, and kingdom that is perfected for eternity at the return of Christ (Hoekma).
• Christ will return and resurrect all people at the same time (Jn. 5:25-30).
• The general judgment will follow.
• The new heaven and new earth will be established for all eternity.

With Postmillennialism:

• The New Testament church becomes the Israel of God (Gal.6:16). (agrees with Amillennialism)
• The Kingdom of God is a present reality. (agrees with Amillennialism)
• The Kingdom of God is essentially redemptive and spiritual in character rather than political and physical. (agrees with Amillennialism)
• The Holy Spirit will gradually bring about a period of virtual triumph of true Christianity before Christ returns. (opposes Amillennialism)
• The millennium will close with the second coming of Christ. (agrees with Amillennialism)
• The Resurrection will be general--all people at the same time. (agrees with Amillennialism)
• The general judgment will follow. (agrees with Amillennialism)
• Then the eternal kingdom will begin. (agrees with Amillennialism)

While it is true that most postmillennialists look forward to a 'golden age', a period of spiritual prosperity, this does not mean that every person will be a Christian or that all sin will be abolished (Boettner, Loraine. The Millennium. Grand Rapids, Baker Book House, 1958). This period of spiritual prosperity comes about gradually "as an increasingly larger proportion of the world's inhabitants are converted to Christianity." Many have often noted how that plays out when it comes to the church age itself seeing eras where literally the ENTIRE world was Christian Dominated----from the era of Constantine in the Roman Empire (which GREATLY gave power to the church/set the stage for future developments) to what occurred with Christianity in Eastern lands....and to some degree, what has occurred with things such as the time of the Maritime exploration when nearly all of the great kingdoms of that time (i.e. Portugal, Spain, Britain, etc) were "Christian." Some may debate whether that'd be valid since many things done in the name of Christ were anti-Christ/against the scriptures...but there was dominance nonetheless in Christ's name.

The belief in Amillennialism or Preterism also called Victorious eschatology is part and parcel of Dominionist Theology. Amillennialists believes that we are living in the millennial era and Jesus reigns spiritually from heaven. The destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D means that all prophecy in the Bible has been fulfilled – especially the Book of Revelation. Amillennialists can claim the earth and must dominate by instilling Christian principles and a moral code which will create a Christian society so that Jesus can manifest His presence one day and judge the wicked. However, Dominionists can claim the earth and must dominate by instilling Christian principles and a moral code which will create a Christian society so that Jesus can manifest His presence and rule the world.

I often find myself seeing merit in views such as Apostolic Premillennialism”..different from other forms of pre-millennialism (and based more so on the Christ Victor view) by it being more optimistic with the end times — more focused on the Apostolic character of the church that is supposed to be coming. ...and on the same token, the Christus Victor view is separate from that/sufficient by itself and what I think should take prominence since it made a world of difference when it came to knowing how they interacted with the world...knowing the enemy was defeated and thus we have a job to do.

One of the best books I think that addresses the issue of the Rapture is by N.T Wright called Surprised by Hope: Rethinking Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church. Still trying to work my way through it - and in it, Wright challenges the notion of “going to heaven when you die” and spending an eternity in some bodiless future. For if this was the case, Wright says, “then what’s the fuss about putting things right in the present world?” - and yet if you know that Christ will return to conquer the world one day, you should be energized to make a difference in THIS world today....

For some quotes from the work:
Also, as one of my brothers said best (for brief excerpt):

I am pro-Torah, but I'm seeing how dispensational Messianics can be. Adam and Noah and Enoch and Shem and/or Melchizedek and Abraham and everyone up to Moses apparently kept a different law than we do, which is or can be unsettling. But the opposite position, that there have been no changes at all, ever, can it be true ?

Here are some quotes, interpret them how you wish. God could certainly have ordained these apparent changes or innovations through David, of course.

Quotes:

Levitical priests served for 25 years, from age 25 to age 50, according to Numbers 8:24,25.

According to I Chronicles chapter 15, 16:4-6, 37-43, David rearranged the Levitical priesthood into 24 courses (orders); he assigned 16 courses to Eleazer, and 8 courses to Ithamar. This rearrangement was chartered because of a population explosion in David's reign.

(my comment: notice that it is not accredited to God. Are these rearrangements ever accredited to God? He could have done it, but does it say he did?)

Levitical Priesthood (link)


Compare:

This is that which belongeth unto the Levites: from twenty and five years old and upward they shall go in to wait upon the service in the work of the tent of meeting:
Numbers 8:24

The Levites thirty years old or more were counted, and the total number of men was thirty-eight thousand. 1 Chronicles 23:3

According to the last instructions of David, the Levites were counted from those twenty years old or more. 1 Chronicles 23:27

Gxg (G²);63515734 said:

With Adam, there does seem to be a concept of previews in the actions he does - things mentioned in the Mosaic - and what we do now in the New Covenant.

Sacrifices immediately come to mind...for all sacrifices were meant to point to Christ as the ultimate sacrifice...

Romans 3:25
God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished—
Romans 3:24-26 /Romans 3

Hebrews 2:17
For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.
Hebrews 2:16-18

​

With sacrifices, it seems that the means by which they occurred within the OT do not apply in the same way as they do in the New Covenant. The sacrifices of the Lord are now our own bodies----whereas the animal sacrifices only pointed to what Christ was going to do and what it is that He desires of us.

Hebrews 13:16
And do not forget to do good and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God is pleased.
Hebrews 13:15-17

1 Peter 2:5

The Living Stone and a Chosen People

4 As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by God and precious to him— 5you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
1 Peter 2:4-6

Romans 12:1
[ A Living Sacrifice ] Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship.


​

One would be in error, IMHO, saying that any kind of animal sacrifice (if done in a memorial of what the Lord had done) had to be done in the manner that the Mosaic Law outlined since that era has ended....and it was transformed.

On the part concerning burnt offerings/sacrifices, Jesus noted this to a degree during his earthly ministry. For why else did Jesus note in HIS OWN Time (Matthew 9:9-13, Mark 2:13-17, Luke 5:27-32) when it came to his quoting what the scriptures say on Sacrifices in Psalm 51:16-19...in line with I Samuel 15:22-23..when it came His making clear that what God desired was Mercy and NOT Sacrifice? Christ was very radical to choose someone such as Matthew the Tax Collector as one of his disciples....seeing how well known they were for being corrupt/wild in their living....and when Jesus visited Matthew, at the cost of making connections, Jesus hurt his own reputation at first. The Pharisees tried to question Christ by saying he could never be a righteous man by choosing to associate with such immoral people....and yet, Jesus made clear that they were off since they were more concerned with their own OUTER appearance of holiness than with helping people, with criticism than encouraging, with outward respectability than practical help.

Jesus made clear that God was concerned for all people --including sinful and hurting ones (counter to how many of the Jews often acted when making sacrifices and yet mistreating Gentiles)....and Jesus made clear that God was more concerned with the Heart. More than outward appearance, God wanted inward REPENTENCE. Its the reason why Jesus quoted Psalm 51:16-17 when it came to the Psalmists ---in a time of GREAT SIN---made clear that the expression of a sacrifice didn't matter if the heart was not contrite and broken.

Jesus also made certain that he quoted Hosea 6:6 --in line with what the Prophet Isaiah said to Israel in Isaiah 1:1---that sacrifces alone were never God's heart since God desired MERCY and not sacrifice. The prophet Hosea began his ministry during the end of the prosperous but morally declining reigh of Jeroboan II of Israel---prophesing until shortly after the fall of Samaria in 722 B.C (II Kings 17). His role was to show the northern kingdom how unfaithful they had been to God, their "husband" and "provider" and had married themselves to Baal and the gods of Cananna.

The way the people made sacrifices to false gods and tried to appease God with more sacrifices to him would be like a man finding out his wife had an affair---and then having the wife try to cook breakfast/dinner more or go on dates with her husband and give more sex. The other activities would be meaningless if she continued having an affair---or thought that her husaband wanted more and yet she didn't love Him...and Hosea tried to make clear that a religious ritual is only helpful if it is carried out with an attitude of love/ obediance for God....BUT if not having those elements, it will be simply mockery of God. God didn't want the Israelities' rituals as mucha s their hearts....

1 Samuel 15:22
But Samuel replied: “Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the LORD? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams
​

As Isaiah said,

Isaiah 1:10-12
“I have more than enough of burnt offerings,
of rams and the fat of fattened animals;
I have no pleasure
in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.


​

The context of Isaiah's words makes sense in light of how he lived in idolatrous Israel...a prophet during the time when the original nation of Israel had been divided into two kingdoms---Israel in the north and Judah in the South. The entire chapter of Isaiah 1 goes into great detail discussing how God was unhappy with his people....and as Isaiah 1 makes clear, God was unhappy with thier sacrifices while not revoking the system of sacrifices he had initiated with Moeses. Instead, God was calling for sincerefaith and devotion. For as said before, the leaders were carefully making the traditional sacrifices/offerings at Holy Celebrations but still remaining unfaithful to God in their hearts. For sacrifices were to be an OUTWARD sign of their INWARD Faith in God...but outward signs became empty because not inward faith existed. The people continued to offer sacrifices because they had come to place more faith in the rituals of their religion than in the God they worshipped.

One can find more on sacrifices via what Isaiah said in Isaiah 19:20-22, Isaiah 43:23-25, Isaiah 65:6-8, and Isaiah 66:2-4

Ezekiel is another good one, as seen in Ezekiel 20:27-29 , Ezekiel 20:39-41 and Ezekiel 44:14-16, Ezekiel 46:23-24.

And with Jeremiah, one can find more on what he was discussing fully with Sacrifices in Jeremiah 6:19-21 , Jeremiah 17:25-27 ,


God often made clear that sacrifices for its own sake were never appropriate if they were done in an end of themselves---for at that point, one would be lacking a broken/contrite heart in the process (God's Goal) and all one would be doing is ritualism. Its why the Jews were caught off guard before the exile--as they thought they were doing everything right and yet God was not in it.


Adam's sons were raised in the adominition of the Lord---and as God required/made clear, they were to offer up to Him. . Cain and Abel had constrasting occupations/differing kinds of offering to God----both being what God commanded since both offerings are recognizable parts of the later Levitical system: for Cain's offering of the fruit of the ground is in Deuteronomy 26:2 (an offering expressing consecration), and for Abel's offering of the firstborn of his flock, that can be found in Deuteronomy 15:19-23 (a kind of peace offering, a meal in God's prescence). At no point does the Bible suggest that offering work automatically...as if the worshipper's faith and contrition did not matter. For as the Torah makes clear, God desires BROKENESS/Willful humility in order for us to come to Him.....

Psalm 51:16-18
16 You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it;
you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings.
17 The sacrifices of God are [a] a broken spirit;
a broken and contrite heart,
O God, you will not despise.
​

This is a teaching throughout the scriptures----especially as it relates to how often God said he RESISTED the proud---but gave grace to the Humble ( Numbers 12:2-4 , 2 Samuel 22:27-29 , 1 Kings 21:28-29, 2 Kings 22:18-20, 2 Chronicles 12:6-8 , Psalm 18:26-28, Psalm 25:8-10, Psalm 149:3-5, Proverbs 3:34, Isaiah 66:1-3, Luke 18:13-15, James 4:5-7 , 1 Peter 5:4-6, etc )


And with Cain's fundamentally bad heart, this can be seen in his resentment toward his brother and in his uncoopertative answers to God in the rest of the pasage in Genesis 4. He chose not to love God...or His neighbor. Cain demonstrated an evil heart by his wicked deeds, whereas Abel demonstated a pious heart by his righteous deeds---and His wholeheartely doing as God commanded. That Abel offered his sacrifice by faith and was COMMENDED as righteous for that reason, cannot be ignored. As the Word says in Genesis 4:1-12, Matthew 23:35, Hebrews 11:4, and 1 John 3:11-13

To focus on the sacrifice itself and not on the heart being transformed---as the New Covenant focuses upon--may miss the point.
__________________

Click to expand...

But He never did say He wanted the one instead of the other. Nor did He say that the other was abrogated, only that it was secondary.

Shimshon said:

The gospel was not about Torah, it was about Yeshua, which the Torah reveals but not in full. Yeshua testified, taught, used the Torah to witness about Himself, not about Torah.

Why would he teach observance to commands that he knew would be inoperable for over 2000 years?

Click to expand...

Technically, when it comes to how the Lord did things, He also made it a focus to place emphasis onto Himself - and show where all things were meant to point to HIM. This is the entire concept of the Law of Christ, which many sadly do not understand and show ignorance of as if it was never in existence when scripture is exceptionally plain on the matter.
And as said before, on the Law of Christ, in the Epistle to the Galatians, written by Paul of Tarsus to a number of early Christian communities in the Roman province of Galatia in central Anatolia, he wrote: "Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." (Galatians 6:2). ..and of course, "If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,”[ you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors" - from James 2:8 and based in Leviticus 19:18.

Most have noted this to be an allusion either to the Second greatest commandment ("love thy neighbor") or the New Commandment ("love one another"). On 1 Corinthians 9:20-22 / 1 Corinthians 9 - there was more by Derek Lemnan at “The Law of Christ” | Messianic Jewish Musings.


Dr. Michael Brown AND Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum did some excellent work in addressing the issue for what it was - as it has never been something hidden nor difficult to understand, if truly wishing to understand what the Gospel was always centered on.

• Believers and the Law of Moses : Line of Fire
• Ariel Ministries: MBS Excerpt - The Law of Moses and the Law of Christ

Additionally, there was something I recall from last year that was very in-depth yet resourceful when it came to understanding the entire background behind the Law (as seen in #704 /#715 )- from Brother mpossoff when he shared an audio teaching on the Mosaic Covenant - entitled The Mosaic Laws, by Brother Doug Friedman of Ben David Messianic Jewish congregation. He also did another excellent one entitled The Ten Commandments: Suggestions or Concepts?

yedida said:

But He never did say He wanted the one instead of the other. Nor did He say that the other was abrogated, only that it was secondary.

Click to expand...

Yeshua and the Father already noted where those things were completed when examining the reality behind what occurred with sacrifices in the first place that dealt with atonement. If those were not done away with, then who they point to in anticipation has not arrived yet - for Yeshua was the goal behind those sacrifices. And it's why the early body of believers did not continue to make those types of sacrifices after His Resurrection.


Of course, that did not mean ALL types of sacrifices were done away with - as even Paul and others still made sacrifices (although they were in regards to free will and fellowship offerings - in addition to some instances of the Nazarene Vow from Numbers 6 being transformed). Some of this was discussed before elsewhere...as seen here in #25 / #37. As it is, Paul stands out - as he was born Tarsus/grew up in Jerusalem and studied under the famous Rabbi Gamaliel. (Acts 22:3) - a legendary Rabbi who was also mentioned in Acts 5:34-40 where he commanded the Sanhedrin to give the Apostles some liberty, following the traditional Jewish belief that God is the final arbiter in all matters of truth and error. And Paul was faithful in his observance - and yet he still differed on some things. His disagreement with Peter (Galatians 2:11-14) was purely about the requirement of the Gentiles to convert to Judaism, not about the lifestyle of the Jewish believers and what many Christians claim when trying to dismiss things like all types of sacrifices. He criticised Peter for his inconsistency because he was willing to live like the Gentiles when he was with the Gentiles, and then he expected the Gentiles to live like Jews. Moreover, during his ministry there are a number of occasions where Paul is seen observing a distinctly Jewish lifestyle.

• Paul went to Jerusalem for the "feast", probably Passover, at the end of his second journey. (Acts 18:21-22).

• Paul sailed away from Philippi "after the days of unleavened bread" (Acts 20:6). Essentially, this means he observed Passover and the days of unleavened bread with the church at Philippi. The same in regards to his value for Passover can also be seen in I Corinthians 16 when he informed them of his travel plans and his wish to stay in Ephesus till Pentecost - the festival that took place each spring some weeks after Passover (II Maccabees 12:32, Acts 2:1, etc.) And sacrifices would've been made.

• After leaving Phillipi he sailed along the coast of Asia Minor, stopping at a few places along the way, but missing out Ephesus because he wanted to be in Jerusalem for the feast of Pentecost. (Acts 20:16). This was at the end of his third journey.

• Paul observed that the prison ship, on which he was sailing to Rome, was going too slowly and "the fast was now already past". (Acts 27:9). This means he observed Yom Kippur.

Thus, anyone saying that the Apostles or others in 1st Century Judaism (or 1st Century Messianic Judaism/Jewish Christianity) were not concerned about any type of observances or sacrifices are simply not listening since their lifestyles made plain it was important...just as it is for Messianic Jews/Hebrew Christians today. What what Paul developed further in examination/analysis after his conversion was Transcultural Judaism - on the basis of what Yeshua did when it came to universalizing many concepts within Judaism (more shared here in #91 ).

There are examples of Apostles making offerings and sacrifices after the death of Messiah, not the least of which was Paul. Then there is the story of the arrest of Peter by Herod, an estimated 10 years after His death and Resurrection, that shows the disciples gathered in Jerusalem for Pesach; keeping the Torah calendar.

<edit>Y'shua taught that not the smallest stroke would pass from Torah while the heavens and the earth still stood. I just looked outside and concluded that you are teaching error.

Shimshon said:

True God hates that, but 1.you've given another false witness. You may have had that experience within a congregation as none are perfect. But as a whole there are many statements by these "abc" organizations that address this very issue of secondclass citizenry which prove you dead wrong. 1. So please stop with the false witness and misrepresentations of Messianic Jewish organizations and it's members.

That would be against the rules you keep using against others here. You keep claiming who we are and are not, who is who and 2.you continually misrepresent much about Messianic Judaism as a whole. By your own admissions you have no need for the historically established form of Messianic Judaism. 3.Your position is very subversive, is it no wonder you fight much in here? The forums are named Messianic Judaism but you deny the historical established community? 4.If you want to be apart of MJ maybe trying to "join" the established community would be the correct method, instead of coming in from the outside and seeking to turn it on it's head. One method seeks to join with another in love, the other seeks to divide and conquer. You tell me which of those God hates?

Click to expand...

1. Three times or more you have made an accusation of yedida giving false witness when she is only testifying to what she has seen and experienced. You are making a false accusation against her in doing so, as well as breaking the rule against l'shon hara. Rule #3 about personal attacks which this clearly is.
2. She is not misrepresenting MJ as a whole and MJ as a whole is not only one sided, there are many flavors just like in normative Judaism, there varies from a 'reform' type (most like Christianity with Jewish dressing) to Orthodox, where the congregation or organization proclaims to be Torah Observant.
3. She is not trying to overthrow anything, get real. More L'shon hara
4. You haven't been around here much yet you make these accusations without really knowing much about the one you accuse of so much. Yedidah has been a part of more than one Messianic congregation both in her current home and former. She is also well informed on other congregations through online study. She is certainly not an 'outsider' as you have accused her of.

Shimshon said:

The gospel was not about Torah, it was about Yeshua, which the Torah reveals but not in full. Yeshua testified, taught, used the Torah to witness about Himself, not about Torah.

Why would he teach observance to commands that he knew would be inoperable for over 2000 years?

Click to expand...

Well as Talmidim said, there are Messianic Jews (Jews who believe that Messiah has come) and there are those who practice Messianic Judaism. There is also the definitions on these forums, which don't hold the general consensus that Torah was abolished or Torah is for Jews only.

It states:

1. This is a Torah Observant forum where those in Judaism as well as the Gentiles who are coming to Messiah, and those who already know Him, may come and grow and learn more about a Torah observant life in Messiah. We advocate Torah Observance as part of our walk with Messiah Yeshua, since He is our example and was Torah Observant, along with the disciples.

and
6 ...........And although this is a place where you can have your questions answered regarding a Torah pursuant faith in Yeshua The Messiah...it is not a place to pro-actively teach anti-Torah observance. Also there are certain doctrines that although we will discuss to show the truth of the matter, will not be allowed to be freely promoted here at the forum.
*Any theology that teaches Torah has been done away with (Mattityahu/Matthew 5:16-19).
*Any theology that teaches that Torah is not for those of the nations whom have put their trust in Yeshua The Messiah (B'midbar/Numbers 15:15-16, Ephesians 2, Romans 3:31).

Hoshiyya said:

I am pro-Torah, but I'm seeing how dispensational Messianics can be. Adam and Noah and Enoch and Shem and/or Melchizedek and Abraham and everyone up to Moses apparently kept a different law than we do, which is or can be unsettling. But the opposite position, that there have been no changes at all, ever, can it be true ?

Here are some quotes, interpret them how you wish. God could certainly have ordained these apparent changes or innovations through David, of course.

Quotes:

Levitical priests served for 25 years, from age 25 to age 50, according to Numbers 8:24,25.

According to I Chronicles chapter 15, 16:4-6, 37-43, David rearranged the Levitical priesthood into 24 courses (orders); he assigned 16 courses to Eleazer, and 8 courses to Ithamar. This rearrangement was chartered because of a population explosion in David's reign.

(my comment: notice that it is not accredited to God. Are these rearrangements ever accredited to God? He could have done it, but does it say he did?)

Levitical Priesthood (link)


Compare:

This is that which belongeth unto the Levites: from twenty and five years old and upward they shall go in to wait upon the service in the work of the tent of meeting:
Numbers 8:24

The Levites thirty years old or more were counted, and the total number of men was thirty-eight thousand. 1 Chronicles 23:3

According to the last instructions of David, the Levites were counted from those twenty years old or more. 1 Chronicles 23:27

Click to expand...

Some people have wondered the same when it came to the man known as Zadok and wondering how Zadok could support the young King David and then serve Solomon for years since many feel the priestly ministry does not start until a man is 30 years of age.

Of course, one would need to show where Zadok wasn't in his 30s when he began serving David. To my knowledge, the main reference for the 30yrs of age/Priest connection was 1 Chronicles 23:2-4 when it came to counting/numbering the Levites in one instance--and for the other:
Numbers 8 liberalizes the age limits for levitical duty, and other writings expand them even more---if investigating I Chronicles 23 and I Chronicles 23:24/1 Chronicles 23:23-25
The variations/diffeences are presumably due to variations over time in the numbers and duties of the Levities. An upper age limit is more appropriate for those doing heavy work such as transportating (Numbers 3-4)..and in Numbers 8:26, it was noted that Levites over fifty could still assist in the tent of meeting. When the tabernacle was stationary within the temple (I Kings 8:1-13), no such duties would fall to the Levites. Differences in lower age limits may be due to changing numbers of available Levite Males (see Ezra 2 , etc).


If one takes issue with Zadok on the basis of age, the man who was leader before him became corrupt/was displaced...and on the issue of replacements, when no one was available, if disagreeing, it'd be a good thing for one to show where the Law never allowed for exceptions in replacing others who were more righteous than others in a position when they were corrupt.

David Wilkerson (author of the book entitled "Cross and Switchblade" and creator of the organization Teen Challenge ) shared more on the subject here in the thread entitled "The Zadok Priesthood!" by David Wilkerson, founding pastor of Times Square Church ...

The Folks at "Jewish Virtual Library" did an excellent review on the matter, as seen here

But on what you note, I do find it interesting that there seem to be more things which seemed rather direct/explicit with David altering practices - for we see plainly where David had others who were acting as priests even though they were non-Levites.

More was shared from discussion last year in #45 - and as shared before:

annier said:

Heb 7:16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.

Heb 7:18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

Click to expand...

How did Abraham become a priest? Was it not because of Malki-Tzedek? A man can NEVER serve as priest for the people unless he is annointed or appointed by someone greater than he.

Now if Malki-Tzedek appointed or blessed Abraham to become a priest/prince; then the Torah must be spiritual or heavenly.

Romans 7
14 For we know that the Torah is of the Spirit; but as for me, I am bound to the old nature, sold to sin as a slave.