Circumcision

[etZion]

[/URL]

No there are different kinds of goyim.

Those that are 'heathen' knowing of the true G-d but not wanting to obey him (like Balaam)
Those that are 'strangers' who have heard of the G-d of Israel and believe he is the true G-d (Like Orpah)
Those that want to be counted among his people. (Like Ruth)

You cannot merge them all into one box.

If it were true what you say here:



Then that means they considered all the Roman's who tread down the Holy City and the land that G-d gave our ancestors as strangers or Gerim? and they are the same as the Gentile believers?

Again excellent points Lulav. Marc's error is in not understanding distinctions.

Marc probably thinks, and let me know if I misunderstand you Marc, but since even gentiles among the nations who believe in Yeshua are still considered the nations and since you do not make any distinctions, then according to Zech 14:2, gentile believers will be at war with Israel and God will then come and destroy us in verse 3... Let me know if this is your thinking, and why or why not?

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

Again excellent points Lulav. Marc's error is in not understanding distinctions.

Marc probably thinks, and let me know if I misunderstand you Marc, but since even gentiles among the nations who believe in Yeshua are still considered the nations and since you do not make any distinctions, then according to Zech 14:2, gentile believers will be at war with Israel and God will then come and destroy us in verse 3... Let me know if this is your thinking, and why or why not?

Nope. The Gentiles who believe in Israel's Messiah the Apostle's considered them strangers that sojourn among us, even though they don't live in the Land.

Might very well be in those days that Gentiles will be strangers that dwell among you in the Land.

The point is there are laws that are universal equally to the native born and the stranger who sojourns among you. There are laws that apply to Jews only.

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

This audio is in line with what I'm pointing out.

http://www.bethimmanuel.org/sites/default/files/audio/the_apostolic_decree.mp3

My stance is that if you're a believer in Israel's Messiah and you're not Jewish you're considered a stranger that sojourns among us, which means your constitution is the Law of Moses. There are laws that are universal, laws that only apply to Jews, laws that don't apply to Jews, laws that apply to men, women, slaves etc.

 

[etZion]

This audio is in line with what I'm pointing out.

http://www.bethimmanuel.org/sites/default/files/audio/the_apostolic_decree.mp3

My stance is that if you're a believer in Israel's Messiah and you're not Jewish you're considered a stranger that sojourns among us, which means your constitution is the Law of Moses. There are laws that are universal, laws that only apply to Jews, laws that don't apply to Jews, laws that apply to men, women, slaves etc.

Thanks, I will check out the link.

I think, I have seen you say in other places that gentiles in Messiah are not part of the Mosaic covenant, and thus the Law of Moses cannot be a gentile believers constitution... It seems like you are saying two different things?

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

Thanks, I will check out the link.

I think, I have seen you say in other places that gentiles in Messiah are not part of the Mosaic covenant, and thus the Law of Moses cannot be a gentile believers constitution... It seems like you are saying two different things?

If it appears that I said that, then I was misunderstood. I even posted a video interview with Rabbi Chernoff of the MJAA. He says the same thing, that Gentiles are 'spiritually' part of Israel. I'll see if I can find the video.

The law of Moses is the constitution for Israel which sets Israel apart. The stranger that sojourns among us although there are laws that are universal, there are laws that are only for children of Abraham , Isaac and Jacob.

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

Here's the video. Listen to what Chernoff says at 11:50

Jewish Voice Extended Interview with Rabbi David Chernoff - YouTube

 

[Shimshon]

Again excellent points Lulav. Marc's error is in not understanding distinctions.

Marc probably thinks, and let me know if I misunderstand you Marc, but since even gentiles among the nations who believe in Yeshua are still considered the nations and since you do not make any distinctions, then according to Zech 14:2, gentile believers will be at war with Israel and God will then come and destroy us in verse 3... Let me know if this is your thinking, and why or why not?

How about the distinction made within the Torah itself?

Leviticus 20
22 'You shall therefore keep all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them, that the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out. 23 And you shall not walk in the statutes of the nation which I am casting out before you; for they commit all these things, and therefore I abhor them. 24 But I have said to you, "You shall inherit their land, and I will give it to you to possess, a land flowing with milk and honey." I am the Lord your God, who has separated you from the peoples. 25 You shall therefore distinguish between clean animals and unclean, between unclean birds and clean, and you shall not make yourselves abominable by beast or by bird, or by any kind of living thing that creeps on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean.

26 And you shall be holy to Me, for I the Lord am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be Mine.
​

What did the Lord give/do to separate them, us Jews? We, unlike the nations, distinguish between clean and unclean...we follow Torah. Because it was given by God to separate us from the nations around us. It's what defines a Jew from a Gentile. According to God himself. You know, according to ..Torah.... It is THE LAW, as given by the Lord. And Judaism 101, be it Orthodox or Messianic. The Torah was given as a wall between Israel and the nations of the world. It's what made Israel 'holy' to God and the nations not so much. It's how the world knew who were the Lords people and who were not.

Now why are there those here teaching that the nations were all called to observe these statutes and judgements? Wouldn't that be anti-Torah to openly teach?

And to negate the common Jewish understanding on this, calling it unlearned and uninformed, or worse racist, wouldn't that be defining ones theology in contrast to traditional Judaism? How could that be a suportive stance toward Jewish history and the current Jewish community? Two things that are hallmarks of a Messianic 'Jew'.


I mean, it's o.k. to have an opinon but this theology is being pushed as far more than an opinion in here. No Torah, no love, no way to God. That's the theology I see presented in here by non-Jewish Messianics. Something completely opposed to Torah and both the historical and current Jewish community. The stance is an 'anti' stance. The whole identity is based upon contrasting ones self with any existing belief. That if one can not identify that Christianity is based on err, as well as Judaism, and leave both respective camps to find a new Truth who's focus is to contrast ones self against the existing community, then one is not part of the community.

So, how do you contrast your theology against the above quoted text in Torah? I see this as the most definitive statement possible. What verses can you think that describe such a definitive opposite? Most verse I see used are reading into the point. Not a clear statement such as this. Using Abraham, or the Pharisees to contrive the point. Care to provide a counter that states the Torah given Israel through Moses at Sinai was actually given to those it was meant to seperate from? Yes, a loaded question, but I think your battlement can withstand that question.

 

[visionary]

How about the distinction made within the Torah itself?

Leviticus 20
22 'You shall therefore keep all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them, that the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out. 23 And you shall not walk in the statutes of the nation which I am casting out before you; for they commit all these things, and therefore I abhor them. 24 But I have said to you, "You shall inherit their land, and I will give it to you to possess, a land flowing with milk and honey." I am the Lord your God, who has separated you from the peoples. 25 You shall therefore distinguish between clean animals and unclean, between unclean birds and clean, and you shall not make yourselves abominable by beast or by bird, or by any kind of living thing that creeps on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean.

26 And you shall be holy to Me, for I the Lord am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be Mine.
​

What did the Lord give/do to separate them, us Jews? We, unlike the nations, distinguish between clean and unclean...we follow Torah. Because it was given by God to separate us from the nations around us. It's what defines a Jew from a Gentile. According to God himself. You know, according to ..Torah.... It is THE LAW, as given by the Lord. And Judaism 101, be it Orthodox or Messianic. The Torah was given as a wall between Israel and the nations of the world. It's what made Israel 'holy' to God and the nations not so much. It's how the world knew who were the Lords people and who were not.

Now why are there those here teaching that the nations were all called to observe these statutes and judgements? Wouldn't that be anti-Torah to openly teach?

And to negate the common Jewish understanding on this, calling it unlearned and uninformed, or worse racist, wouldn't that be defining ones theology in contrast to traditional Judaism? How could that be a suportive stance toward Jewish history and the current Jewish community? Two things that are hallmarks of a Messianic 'Jew'.


I mean, it's o.k. to have an opinon but this theology is being pushed as far more than an opinion in here. No Torah, no love, no way to God. That's the theology I see presented in here by non-Jewish Messianics. Something completely opposed to Torah and both the historical and current Jewish community. The stance is an 'anti' stance. The whole identity is based upon contrasting ones self with any existing belief. That if one can not identify that Christianity is based on err, as well as Judaism, and leave both respective camps to find a new Truth who's focus is to contrast ones self against the existing community, then one is not part of the community.

So, how do you contrast your theology against the above quoted text in Torah? I see this as the most definitive statement possible. What verses can you think that describe such a definitive opposite? Most verse I see used are reading into the point. Not a clear statement such as this. Using Abraham, or the Pharisees to contrive the point. Care to provide a counter that states the Torah given Israel through Moses at Sinai was actually given to those it was meant to seperate from? Yes, a loaded question, but I think your battlement can withstand that question.

I see those verses speaking to "His" people... the thing that separates them is in the obedience... just as there was a mixed crowd at the base of Mount Sinai getting the message and saying we will obey.. they too are included as "His People" and this distinguished anyone who obeys from the other nations of the world who won't.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

This audio is in line with what I'm pointing out.

http://www.bethimmanuel.org/sites/default/files/audio/the_apostolic_decree.mp3

My stance is that if you're a believer in Israel's Messiah and you're not Jewish you're considered a stranger that sojourns among us, which means your constitution is the Law of Moses. There are laws that are universal, laws that only apply to Jews, laws that don't apply to Jews, laws that apply to men, women, slaves etc.

Here's the video. Listen to what Chernoff says at 11:50

Jewish Voice Extended Interview with Rabbi David Chernoff - YouTube

Thanks for the information shared on the issue - even though there are differing types of Gentiles, it was never the case that scripture noted Gentiles to be living as Israelites being the represenation of how God interacted with all Gentiles around the world who were not in Israel or joined with Israel and yet still allies of Israel/a part of God's Kingdom. Deuteronomy 14:21 is one of the main examples of what it is that is noted in the Gentiles/foreigners within Israel being given differing laws..as the text states plainly, "Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to the foreigner residing in any of your towns, and they may eat it, or you may sell it to any other foreigner. But you are a people holy to the LORD your God. Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk."


Of course, Lev. 17:15 which when compared to Deut. 14:21 offers a seeming contradiction:

"When any person eats an animal which dies or is torn by beasts, whether he is a native or an alien (GER), he shall wash his cloths and bathe in water, and remain unclean until evening; then he will become clean."

However, Leviticus 17:15 says that the impurity of the act must be dealt with..and when seeing the entire context, it seems plain that part of the focus is upon those entering the temple since impurity defiles God's Temple (Lev 15:31; Num 19:13). It does not say it is forbidden for the sojourner and foreigner to eat the meat. Most kinds of impurity do not involve sin (childbirth, menstruation, caring for a corpse), although they all require purification of some type. If Israelites can sell unclean meat to non-Jews, it seems it is no sin for non-Jews to eat unclean meat. If they do it in the land, they simply need to practice purification as specified in Lev 17:15 (when the Temple is standing).

There are other things to consider in regards to sub-laws within the same universal/overarching Law that both Gentiles and Jews were under. Exodus 12:48 says that circumcision is optional for even a Sojourner living in Israel (much less a non-Jew living in Georgia or wherever other Non-Jews are). Exodus 31:13 says the Sabbath is a sign between Israel and God (not a universal command). There has always been distinctions between those who are believing Jews and believing Gentiles...and one must be careful to remember who the sojourner is: a non-Jew who has come to dwell in Israel and who takes on many of Israel’s obligations, though not all. A sojourner in Israel had a status that would have to be considered greater toward the Torah than a non-Jew in the Messianic Jewish movement today. That is, the position of a sojourner was not at all ambiguous. Such a person lived within Israel’s borders and was obligated by Israel’s law to observe the Sabbath and holy days along with Israel. Circumcision and full participation (today it is called conversion) was optional, but a certain set of standards was not optional.

But ultimately, what matters is whether people are looking plainly to the Lord-the only one who can bring true salvation rather than the Law:

Acts 13:36-41
“Now when David had served God’s purpose in his own generation, he fell asleep; he was buried with his ancestors and his body decayed. 37 But the one whom God raised from the dead did not see decay.

38 “Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. 39 Through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain under the law of Moses. 40 Take care that what the prophets have said does not happen to you:

41 “‘Look, you scoffers,
wonder and perish,
for I am going to do something in your days
that you would never believe,
even if someone told you.’[e]”
​

The Torah (as opposed to Rabbinic writings) says that there are two types of Gentiles: covenanted and uncovenanted. And this idea is derived from looking at the MS (Masoretic Text) and the LXX (Septuagint) since the hebrew word for a landless sojourner was "ger." Historically, no gerim were allowed to own land (at least not until eschaton in Eze 47)....yet the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible used two different words for ger. This was because if it was a religious context the translators wanted to capture that by using the word "proselyte" and if it was a non-religious context the translators wanted to capture that by using the word "paroikos". The passages of Torah that say "One law for native [ezrach] and sojourner [proselyte]" evidence that the covenanted ger possessed some rights of citizenship (but not all - they still couldn't own land). ..yet it also noted how those outside of the covenanted ger were NOT cut off from relationship with God if they lived presently. They just were not able to recieve all the promises that came with the Covenant given to Israel...

And this goes well with what Ephesians 2 notes.

"Remember that at that time you were separate from Messiah, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Messiah you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Messiah."

It seems Paul contrasts the gentile pre- and post-Messiah states, and in doing so, implies that Gentiles are no longer foreigners to the covenants. Consequently, Gentiles in Messiah are something more than the ger foreigners which the Torah speaks of, and by all means removed from the pagan nations spoken of in the Torah.

Paul’s language in Ephesians 2:12 and 19 shows how is mixing two things that are not perfectly compatible, as one set of terminology he is using is the Torah’s language about native-born versus resident alien....and yet the other set of terminology he is using is the Roman concept of citizenship for people outside of Rome, people who are not natives of Rome. Since Ephesians is a letter circulating among the Gentile congregations,it'd make sense that Roman customs are most familiar to them. Furthermore, Paul himself is a Roman citizen though he not a native Roman. Consequently, what occurs is that Paul’s audience has a conundrum based on the Torah - for they have come to a faith influenced by Jewish thought - and they have alienated themselves from the Greco-Roman world by becoming "atheists" in the eyes of others (disbelievers in the gods of the nations) and yet they are also not Israelites ....feeling alienated from the synagogues and Jewish communities scattered about too. In many respects, they have become a non-people - as it must seem to them - or a socially homeless people.

But Paul corrected that by noting how they were to Israel what a Roman citizen like himself is to Rome. They used to be excluded, but now they are citizens. And they are not natives, but citizens. Of course, this is not exactly a category that exists in the Torah itself. For these Gentiles have not become resident aliens (sojourners, strangers) as the Torah describes non-Jews who reside permanently in Israel...and yet neither have they become Israelites (native-born). ...but they are not foreigners anymore to the covenants of God made through Israel. Rather, they are insiders now - and since the Torah did not have a category really for this, at least not explicitly, it brings out the aspect of how Mosaic law was not the basis for all things that had to always occur NOR did it always spell things out. On where Paul stood with the Torah, Genesis 12:2-3 and other promises in Genesis related to the blessing of God coming to all of earth’s families and peoples of all nations through the family of Abraham - Galatians 2-3 notes this as well - and outside of Torah he has Psalms and Isaiah, among other texts, promising that the light God has given Israel will come to the nations (Gentiles).

Again, good info..and thanks for sharing as you did

 

[Shimshon]

I see those verses speaking to "His" people... the thing that separates them is in the obedience... just as there was a mixed crowd at the base of Mount Sinai getting the message and saying we will obey.. they too are included as "His People" and this distinguished anyone who obeys from the other nations of the world who won't.

Yes, the mixed became one. But that which seperated them out as one was not given to the rest of the nations.

Verse 20 proves the point even more.

and perform them, that the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out.
​

The statutes and judgements were to be performed (so) that the land where God was bringing them to live would not reject them. Meaning the laws were given to seperate the newly formed nation from the rest of the nations of the world, and would be completely connected to living within the Land. No land no Torah/No Torah no Land. The Torah was completely connected to the Promised land. It could not function without it.

The same way today we are the representation of the Land (body of Messiah), just as Messiah is the representation of Israel (the servant of God). We have been set apart through Messiah as a first fruits offering to God. Just like Moses set apart the mixed multitude, Yeshua sets apart the mixed multitude from the rest of the nations. Using the Words that came out of his mouth on Mt. Zion! Torah has gone out from Tziyon, the living water is being poured out...all nations are called to God through Messiah Yeshua.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Decision at the council, a written decree of the council to the Gentiles.

Ac 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turning to God:
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

They send chosen men to deliver the writing (a decree) to the Gentiles. To confirm the sentence ( which was by the Holy spirit)

23 And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia:
24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

Again, we have repeated that the decision was not written to the Jews, or concerning the Jews...
They are not to observe any such thing.....

Ac 21:19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come.
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.

I think what often happens is that people read Acts 15 and assume (because they laid out qualifications for Gentiles) that the Gentiles were simply new to the faith. That however does not line up at all with the previous settings in Acts 13 when Paul and Barnabas noted repeatedly to the Jews resisting them how God was going to give eternal life to the Gentiles instead and they'd enter in - and their issue in Acts 15 was others assuming the Gentiles were not already sanctified where they were even as they didn't live fully as the Jews did. Acts 11 saw this issue come up with the Jews offended at Paul going into the House of a Gentile and then being convinced salvation had come to the Gentiles as well.

He had already encouraged the Gentiles seeking God to continue in the grace of God in Acts 13:43-54 alongside Barnabas...and Peter - having been transformed by his experience with Cornelius after many years - noted how there was no need to add more burdens onto the Gentiles that even the Jews couldn't bear. It would not have honored the Lord...

And thus, the list in Acts 15 was a confirmation of what was already happening amongst the Gentiles since others not authorized by them were sent out saying they HAD to do more instead of what was already occurring and what Paul defended in Acts 15 when it came to noting how the Gentiles they worked with on the mission field for years were FAR from pagans or heathens. All of the qualifications noted in Acts 15 were simply things which were universal (as shared before here, here and here/here) and already occurring in Gentile culture - and for the Jews who would wonder, the list sent out by the council would confirm what the Gentiles were already doing if the Jews wondered "SHould they not be doing more?" - one of the reasons there was rejoicing and peace given to them.

 

[mercy1061]

How about the distinction made within the Torah itself?

Leviticus 20
22 'You shall therefore keep all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them, that the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out. 23 And you shall not walk in the statutes of the nation which I am casting out before you; for they commit all these things, and therefore I abhor them. 24 But I have said to you, "You shall inherit their land, and I will give it to you to possess, a land flowing with milk and honey." I am the Lord your God, who has separated you from the peoples. 25 You shall therefore distinguish between clean animals and unclean, between unclean birds and clean, and you shall not make yourselves abominable by beast or by bird, or by any kind of living thing that creeps on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean.

26 And you shall be holy to Me, for I the Lord am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be Mine.
​

What did the Lord give/do to separate them, us Jews? We, unlike the nations, distinguish between clean and unclean...we follow Torah. Because it was given by God to separate us from the nations around us. It's what defines a Jew from a Gentile. According to God himself. You know, according to ..Torah.... It is THE LAW, as given by the Lord. And Judaism 101, be it Orthodox or Messianic. The Torah was given as a wall between Israel and the nations of the world. It's what made Israel 'holy' to God and the nations not so much. It's how the world knew who were the Lords people and who were not.

Now why are there those here teaching that the nations were all called to observe these statutes and judgements? Wouldn't that be anti-Torah to openly teach?

And to negate the common Jewish understanding on this, calling it unlearned and uninformed, or worse racist, wouldn't that be defining ones theology in contrast to traditional Judaism? How could that be a suportive stance toward Jewish history and the current Jewish community? Two things that are hallmarks of a Messianic 'Jew'.


I mean, it's o.k. to have an opinon but this theology is being pushed as far more than an opinion in here. No Torah, no love, no way to God. That's the theology I see presented in here by non-Jewish Messianics. Something completely opposed to Torah and both the historical and current Jewish community. The stance is an 'anti' stance. The whole identity is based upon contrasting ones self with any existing belief. That if one can not identify that Christianity is based on err, as well as Judaism, and leave both respective camps to find a new Truth who's focus is to contrast ones self against the existing community, then one is not part of the community.

So, how do you contrast your theology against the above quoted text in Torah? I see this as the most definitive statement possible. What verses can you think that describe such a definitive opposite? Most verse I see used are reading into the point. Not a clear statement such as this. Using Abraham, or the Pharisees to contrive the point. Care to provide a counter that states the Torah given Israel through Moses at Sinai was actually given to those it was meant to seperate from? Yes, a loaded question, but I think your battlement can withstand that question.

He is refering to only one nation, the canaanite nation that was cast out and no longer exists. Yet ancient Israel intermingled with them. You remember Noah cursed Canaan?

 

[etZion]

To Talmidim, sorry for derailing the thread...

If it appears that I said that, then I was misunderstood. I even posted a video interview with Rabbi Chernoff of the MJAA. He says the same thing, that Gentiles are 'spiritually' part of Israel. I'll see if I can find the video.

The law of Moses is the constitution for Israel which sets Israel apart. The stranger that sojourns among us although there are laws that are universal, there are laws that are only for children of Abraham , Isaac and Jacob.

Thanks for clarifying.

I saw that video, but some when referring to "spiritual", write off any literal implications, so when people use the word spiritual, I only take that with a grain of salt.

 

[etZion]

How about the distinction made within the Torah itself?

Leviticus 20
22 'You shall therefore keep all My statutes and all My judgments, and perform them, that the land where I am bringing you to dwell may not vomit you out. 23 And you shall not walk in the statutes of the nation which I am casting out before you; for they commit all these things, and therefore I abhor them. 24 But I have said to you, "You shall inherit their land, and I will give it to you to possess, a land flowing with milk and honey." I am the Lord your God, who has separated you from the peoples. 25 You shall therefore distinguish between clean animals and unclean, between unclean birds and clean, and you shall not make yourselves abominable by beast or by bird, or by any kind of living thing that creeps on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean.

26 And you shall be holy to Me, for I the Lord am holy, and have separated you from the peoples, that you should be Mine.

​

What did the Lord give/do to separate them, us Jews? We, unlike the nations, distinguish between clean and unclean...we follow Torah. Because it was given by God to separate us from the nations around us. It's what defines a Jew from a Gentile. According to God himself. You know, according to ..Torah.... It is THE LAW, as given by the Lord. And Judaism 101, be it Orthodox or Messianic. The Torah was given as a wall between Israel and the nations of the world. It's what made Israel 'holy' to God and the nations not so much. It's how the world knew who were the Lords people and who were not.

I would say you have misunderstood. The distinction represented a covenant relationship with God, with a specific ethnic group, which also so happened, that Gentiles were welcome to join, so it was not simply a ethnic issue, as you argue when you say the difference between "a Jew and a Gentile". This is further verified when it says God abhors them, their abominations. You seem to think God was simply painting the nations blue and painting the Jews green, as if they are simply represented by a different culture and that nothing is wrong with the different cultures, just different. But that is not what the text you quoted is teaching. The distinctions represent the righteousness and wisdom of God, while the nations represented abominations and things God abhorred.

The point, is that Israel was not to be a wall, but to be an example or a light to the nations. The nations were to see the wisdom and righteousness of God, in His covenant people, and want to do like wise. You stating that Israel was called to be separate only to be another culture on the earth, because God likes diversity, is nonsense.

Now why are there those here teaching that the nations were all called to observe these statutes and judgements? Wouldn't that be anti-Torah to openly teach?

First of all, we believe that gentiles who are in covenant with God are to keep the Laws. I do not believe gentiles who are not in covenant, to be responsible, that would be wrong, however the setting up of God's kingdom on earth will change even this. At the same time, we know that the Law is planned to go to the Nations in the Messianic era, and thus it is correct that Torah should go to the nations and anti-Torah for it not to go to the nations.

And to negate the common Jewish understanding on this, calling it unlearned and uninformed, or worse racist, wouldn't that be defining ones theology in contrast to traditional Judaism? How could that be a suportive stance toward Jewish history and the current Jewish community? Two things that are hallmarks of a Messianic 'Jew'.

First of all there is no monolithic Judaism, and second, not everything Judaism teaches is correct, much in the same way of Christianity, 'normative' Christianity, supports replacement theology and in many cases anti-semitism. This does not mean everything about Christianity is wrong. The common Jewish understanding is that Yeshua, is not the Messiah, and is instead a gentile idol... so if you want to support Jewish history and traditional Judaism, then you must agree...

Also consider Ephesians 3, Paul says their is mystery that is just now being revealed in his day, that was not known to Judaism before, and that was that gentiles in the Messiah are fellow heirs, members of the same body, partakers of the promise... Go tell that to normative Judaism, and let me know what their response is to you.

I mean, it's o.k. to have an opinon but this theology is being pushed as far more than an opinion in here. No Torah, no love, no way to God. That's the theology I see presented in here by non-Jewish Messianics. Something completely opposed to Torah and both the historical and current Jewish community. The stance is an 'anti' stance. The whole identity is based upon contrasting ones self with any existing belief. That if one can not identify that Christianity is based on err, as well as Judaism, and leave both respective camps to find a new Truth who's focus is to contrast ones self against the existing community, then one is not part of the community.

To think that Christianity and Judaism are both in error, and thus should be thrown to the side, is an error in itself, but to think they are infallible as you propose, is also an error. It is about finding a balance, finding truth. I do not shun Christianity or Judaism, and support both, but I also know the errors of Christianity and Judaism and I do not ignore them.

So, how do you contrast your theology against the above quoted text in Torah? I see this as the most definitive statement possible. What verses can you think that describe such a definitive opposite? Most verse I see used are reading into the point. Not a clear statement such as this. Using Abraham, or the Pharisees to contrive the point. Care to provide a counter that states the Torah given Israel through Moses at Sinai was actually given to those it was meant to seperate from? Yes, a loaded question, but I think your battlement can withstand that question.

I answered most of this in my response under the scripture above.

I will make an example, if I say, "This is a man's club, only men can join..." and I allow a female to join, is it truly only a man's club? The Torah was given to Israel as nation, but all were welcome to join or come in, to say it is only for Israel, and allow gentiles to come in, is a contradiction in and of itself, much like the example I gave above.

While I don't see the Torah as applicable to those among the nations who do not hold a covenant relationship with God, I do see it as a future prophetic fulfillment. As we read in both Micah and Isaiah. However my view of gentiles who are now in covenant with God, are responsible to keep the Torah.

Paul uses similar language to the verses you posted above in Ephesians 4:17, he writes: Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do...

Even a gentile who follows the Messiah, is to be separate and distinct from the ways of the nations. So as to be a light, just like Israel's calling. As the nations are described as living in darkness, while Israel is the light, much like Yeshua is the light, and without Him, one is in darkness. It is a running theme throughout the scriptures.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

We unlike the nations, distinguish between clean and unclean...we follow Torah. Because it was given by God to separate us from the nations around us. It's what defines a Jew from a Gentile. According to God himself. You know, according to ..Torah.... It is THE LAW, as given by the Lord. And Judaism 101, be it Orthodox or Messianic. The Torah was given as a wall between Israel and the nations of the world. It's what made Israel 'holy' to God and the nations not so much. It's how the world knew who were the Lords people and who were not. [/COLOR][/FONT]

Now why are there those here teaching that the nations were all called to observe these statutes and judgements?

Some of this seems interesting when considering Paul in Romans 1:18-28 on the issue of all men being without excuse because God's Law is written already on their very hearts - with evidence of him also seen in creaton. And this is also what Paul notes in Romans 2 with the Gentiles being a law unto themselves even without the knowledge of God'S Torah/God judging them based on what they already know.

Romans 1:18-23
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

Romans 2:12-14
12 For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; 14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, 15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) 16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

17 Indeed you are called a Jew, and rest on the law, and make your boast in God, 18 and know His will, and approve the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law, 19 and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and truth in the law. 21 You, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal? 22 You who say, “Do not commit adultery,” do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law? 24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,”[c] as it is written.

25 For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision? 27 And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the law, judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.

The knowledge of God and His ways have always been there from the beginning, thus not unique to Israel and not unusual to see it reflected in different manners within any pagan society.


One can go no further to see evidence of God's revelation of common knowledge in mankind than in the examination of the Code of Hammurabi ( )?

Of the several law codes surviving from the ancient Middle East, the most famous after the Hebraic Torah is the Code of Hammurabi, who was the sixth king of the Amorite Dynasty of Old Babylon. It is best known from a beautifully engraved diorite stela now in the Louvre Museum which also depicts the king receiving the law from Shamash, the god of justice.

This copy was made long after Hammurabi's time, and it is clear that his was a long-lasting contribution to Mesopotamian civilization. It encodes many laws which had probably evolved over a long period of time, but is interesting to the general reader because of what it tells us about the attitudes and daily lives of the ancient Babylonians. While the precise date of Hammurabi's Code of Laws is disputed by scholars, it is generally believed to have been written between the second year of his reign, circa 1727 BCE, and the end of his reign, circa 1680 BCE, predating the Hebrew "Ten Commandments" by about 500 years. Because of this, it has often been debated on whether or not the 10 Commandments were "stolen" by Moses.....and of course, this is not necessarily true. But the fact that COMMON revelation would be seen in another culture outside of a Jewish one is something to consider.

Again, though It pre-dated MOSAIC Law by centuries, it cannot be ignored that many of the things in the Mosaic Code are identical to what Hammurabi was able to write down/recognize as basic standards of morality.

For more information:

• "Theological Implications of Hammurabi's Code, Mosaic Law, and Justinian's Law" ( ).

 

[Shimshon]

I would say you have misunderstood. The distinction represented a covenant relationship with God, with a specific ethnic group, which also so happened, that Gentiles were welcome to join, so it was not simply a ethnic issue, as you argue when you say the difference between "a Jew and a Gentile". This is further verified when it says God abhors them, their abominations. You seem to think God was simply painting the nations blue and painting the Jews green, as if they are simply represented by a different culture and that nothing is wrong with the different cultures, just different. But that is not what the text you quoted is teaching. The distinctions represent the righteousness and wisdom of God, while the nations represented abominations and things God abhorred.

Welcome to join 'IN THE LAND'. The Torah was never given to the other nations of the world. It was tied to Israel and the Land. "when you enter the land I am giving you......obey."

The point, is that Israel was not to be a wall, but to be an example or a light to the nations. The nations were to see the wisdom and righteousness of God, in His covenant people, and want to do like wise. You stating that Israel was called to be separate only to be another culture on the earth, because God likes diversity, is nonsense.

Sure that's nonsense, i'm not advocating such a thing either. It's not just because God likes diversity. It's explained in his Torah why he did such things.

First of all, we believe that gentiles who are in covenant with God are to keep the Laws. I do not believe gentiles who are not in covenant, to be responsible, that would be wrong, however the setting up of God's kingdom on earth will change even this. At the same time, we know that the Law is planned to go to the Nations in the Messianic era, and thus it is correct that Torah should go to the nations and anti-Torah for it not to go to the nations.

Only when you have one law glasses on can you state this. It's not the plain reading of the text.

First of all there is no monolithic Judaism, and second, not everything Judaism teaches is correct, much in the same way of Christianity, 'normative' Christianity, supports replacement theology and in many cases anti-semitism. This does not mean everything about Christianity is wrong. The common Jewish understanding is that Yeshua, is not the Messiah, and is instead a gentile idol... so if you want to support Jewish history and traditional Judaism, then you must agree...

Can agree with most of this, nobody is perfect here. Though I think you generalize Christianity to push your point. AND your using a fallacy to prove your final point.

So tell me then, David, when he did not attack Saul, he was HAVING to support Saul's ways and evil's? Or did he not touch what the LORD had annointed, even though as a king he was deserving death for not obeying Torah? Why did David not judge and sentence Saul? Why would we do the same to others? It's not a "Messianic" trait.

Also consider Ephesians 3, Paul says their is mystery that is just now being revealed in his day, that was not known to Judaism before, and that was that gentiles in the Messiah are fellow heirs, members of the same body, partakers of the promise... Go tell that to normative Judaism, and let me know what their response is to you.

Yes, and are we to deride them for not knowing Messiah with or are we to suffer with them and maybe be able to reach one as if out of the fire? You seem to say let them burn because well, they suck and are wrong. Which would Messiah do?

To think that Christianity and Judaism are both in error, and thus should be thrown to the side, is an error in itself, but to think they are infallible as you propose, is also an error. It is about finding a balance, finding truth. I do not shun Christianity or Judaism, and support both, but I also know the errors of Christianity and Judaism and I do not ignore them.

I think I'm getting it finally. Your projecting your angst on me. Cause I NEVER proposed any err should be set aside. But like David I do propose you do NOT offend the little ones or the ones who have been formed by the Lord for his purpose. Would you be the one to stone them? Yet the one law Messianic seems to throw stones at them both endlessly. Forgive me if I stand in their stead. Stone me instead! Oh that is what attempts to happen here religiously.

I will make an example, if I say, "This is a man's club, only men can join..." and I allow a female to join, is it truly only a man's club? The Torah was given to Israel as nation, but all were welcome to join or come in, to say it is only for Israel, and allow gentiles to come in, is a contradiction in and of itself, much like the example I gave above.

Bad example. The Torah was never given to the other nations fo the world, nor were the other nations of the world called to enter into the covenant at Siani.

While I don't see the Torah as applicable to those among the nations who do not hold a covenant relationship with God, I do see it as a future prophetic fulfillment. As we read in both Micah and Isaiah. However my view of gentiles who are now in covenant with God, are responsible to keep the Torah.

Paul uses similar language to the verses you posted above in Ephesians 4:17, he writes: Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do...

Even a gentile who follows the Messiah, is to be separate and distinct from the ways of the nations. So as to be a light, just like Israel's calling. As the nations are described as living in darkness, while Israel is the light, much like Yeshua is the light, and without Him, one is in darkness. It is a running theme throughout the scriptures.

Deut 18:21
And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?'--

​

Do you understand this? How may Israel know the word that the LORD has NOT spoken? When was this said, in what context, and why?

It was said by Moses in reference to the coming Messiah.

The context is that God would raise (like a banner) Yeshua, And God would put his words in his mouth and speak. In context, that which is spoken is NOT what was spoken on the mountian. We've seen how Torah refers numerous times to 'what I have commanded you here today'. But this prophet (Yeshua) will speak words that God commads him to. It's not a REpeat or a REnewal of that which was spoken but new words that have not been.

"The Torah which man learns in this world is but vanity compared with the teaching of the Messiah."(Midrash Qoheleth 71,8)

18I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him.

​

Notice the tense? Not 'all that I commanded you today' or at the mountian, but Yeshua speaks commands from God. Whoever does not listen to God's words which Yeshua SHALL speak in God's name..... Not whoever does not listen to the commandements which he shall repeat.

20But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.'
​

We have a prophet that SHALL speak in the future. We are warned that prophets who presume to speak a word of God that he did not command be spoken shall die.

So we have a question then:

'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?

Well, if it's not spoken in Torah we know it's not of God right?!! So why the question? If Yeshua repeats and teaches ONLY that which is commanded to Moses, why were they going to have a problem knowing 'the word spoken as commands by God' from this future prophet?

BECAUSE HE ISN'T REPEATING TORAH GIVEN MOSES!!

He is speaking commands in the name of God that if not followed equal death. "But how will we know if the word he speaks if from God???"

The one law answer, it's already written in the Torah given Moses. The answer from Torah, 'If what he says does not pass, he is not of God and you can ignore him'. Funny, why doesn't it state 'if what he says does not refer back to what was already spoken he is a liar and worthy of death'????

 

[etZion]

Welcome to join 'IN THE LAND'. The Torah was never given to the other nations of the world. It was tied to Israel and the Land. "when you enter the land I am giving you......obey."

I never said it was given to the other nations... what I said was that the nations were welcome to come join. Actually the giving of the Torah occured outside of the land, in the wilderness at at place called Sinai, how come you don't know this?

While I agree much of the Torah cannot be kept outside of the land, there is still much that can be done outside of the land. Even Judaism agrees, there is much that can be done outside of the land.

Can agree with most of this, nobody is perfect here. Though I think you generalize Christianity to push your point. AND your using a fallacy to prove your final point.

So tell me then, David, when he did not attack Saul, he was HAVING to support Saul's ways and evil's? Or did he not touch what the LORD had annointed, even though as a king he was deserving death for not obeying Torah? Why did David not judge and sentence Saul? Why would we do the same to others? It's not a "Messianic" trait.

You made a overly general statement, I was only returning the favor.

As concerning your analogy, I have no idea what you are referring too.

I think I'm getting it finally. Your projecting your angst on me. Cause I NEVER proposed any err should be set aside. But like David I do propose you do NOT offend the little ones or the ones who have been formed by the Lord for his purpose. Would you be the one to stone them? Yet the one law Messianic seems to throw stones at them both endlessly. Forgive me if I stand in their stead. Stone me instead! Oh that is what attempts to happen here religiously.

You are so extreme sometimes, it is hard to take you seriously. Pointing out the errors, in this case, being both that of Christianity or Judaism, does not mean I am metaphorically stoning people as you suggest. Seeing the error of our ways is great for change. If it wasn't for considering replacement theology as error, I would have never seen the promises God has to His people... far from stoning.

Deut 18:21
And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?'--

​

Do you understand this? How may Israel know the word that the LORD has NOT spoken? When was this said, in what context, and why?

It was said by Moses in reference to the coming Messiah.

The context is that God would raise (like a banner) Yeshua, And God would put his words in his mouth and speak. In context, that which is spoken is NOT what was spoken on the mountian. We've seen how Torah refers numerous times to 'what I have commanded you here today'. But this prophet (Yeshua) will speak words that God commads him to. It's not a REpeat or a REnewal of that which was spoken but new words that have not been.

"The Torah which man learns in this world is but vanity compared with the teaching of the Messiah."(Midrash Qoheleth 71,8)

18I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him.

​

Notice the tense? Not 'all that I commanded you today' or at the mountian, but Yeshua speaks commands from God. Whoever does not listen to God's words which Yeshua SHALL speak in God's name..... Not whoever does not listen to the commandements which he shall repeat.

20But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.'
​

We have a prophet that SHALL speak in the future. We are warned that prophets who presume to speak a word of God that he did not command be spoken shall die.

So we have a question then:

'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?

Well, if it's not spoken in Torah we know it's not of God right?!! So why the question? If Yeshua repeats and teaches ONLY that which is commanded to Moses, why were they going to have a problem knowing 'the word spoken as commands by God' from this future prophet?

BECAUSE HE ISN'T REPEATING TORAH GIVEN MOSES!!

He is speaking commands in the name of God that if not followed equal death. "But how will we know if the word he speaks if from God???"

The one law answer, it's already written in the Torah given Moses. The answer from Torah, 'If what he says does not pass, he is not of God and you can ignore him'. Funny, why doesn't it state 'if what he says does not refer back to what was already spoken he is a liar and worthy of death'????

On what test could Israel know Yeshua was the Messiah, according to Deut 13, if the prophet upholds not only the faith of God, but His commandments as well.

Yeshua was born under the Law, if He taught in anyway against the Torah or added or took away, then He not only sinned, but would be considered a false prophet and not the Messiah. Yeshua thus could not speak against the Torah or make up a new one. And we know He did not, because He said very clearly in Matthew 5, He did not come to do away with the Law, and that the Law would not pass until all is fulfilled. All is not fufilled until after the 1000 year reign and so until then, we still have 1000+ years, of God's holy, righteous and good Law. Get used to it, its fantastic, but don't take my word for it, read Psalm 119.

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

Welcome to join 'IN THE LAND'. The Torah was never given to the other nations of the world. It was tied to Israel and the Land. "when you enter the land I am giving you......obey."

Sure that's nonsense, i'm not advocating such a thing either. It's not just because God likes diversity. It's explained in his Torah why he did such things.

Only when you have one law glasses on can you state this. It's not the plain reading of the text.




Can agree with most of this, nobody is perfect here. Though I think you generalize Christianity to push your point. AND your using a fallacy to prove your final point.

So tell me then, David, when he did not attack Saul, he was HAVING to support Saul's ways and evil's? Or did he not touch what the LORD had annointed, even though as a king he was deserving death for not obeying Torah? Why did David not judge and sentence Saul? Why would we do the same to others? It's not a "Messianic" trait.

Yes, and are we to deride them for not knowing Messiah with or are we to suffer with them and maybe be able to reach one as if out of the fire? You seem to say let them burn because well, they suck and are wrong. Which would Messiah do?

I think I'm getting it finally. Your projecting your angst on me. Cause I NEVER proposed any err should be set aside. But like David I do propose you do NOT offend the little ones or the ones who have been formed by the Lord for his purpose. Would you be the one to stone them? Yet the one law Messianic seems to throw stones at them both endlessly. Forgive me if I stand in their stead. Stone me instead! Oh that is what attempts to happen here religiously.

Bad example. The Torah was never given to the other nations fo the world, nor were the other nations of the world called to enter into the covenant at Siani.

Deut 18:21
And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?'--

​

Do you understand this? How may Israel know the word that the LORD has NOT spoken? When was this said, in what context, and why?

It was said by Moses in reference to the coming Messiah.

The context is that God would raise (like a banner) Yeshua, And God would put his words in his mouth and speak. In context, that which is spoken is NOT what was spoken on the mountian. We've seen how Torah refers numerous times to 'what I have commanded you here today'. But this prophet (Yeshua) will speak words that God commads him to. It's not a REpeat or a REnewal of that which was spoken but new words that have not been.

"The Torah which man learns in this world is but vanity compared with the teaching of the Messiah."(Midrash Qoheleth 71,8)

18I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him.

​

Notice the tense? Not 'all that I commanded you today' or at the mountian, but Yeshua speaks commands from God. Whoever does not listen to God's words which Yeshua SHALL speak in God's name..... Not whoever does not listen to the commandements which he shall repeat.

20But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.'
​

We have a prophet that SHALL speak in the future. We are warned that prophets who presume to speak a word of God that he did not command be spoken shall die.

So we have a question then:

'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?

Well, if it's not spoken in Torah we know it's not of God right?!! So why the question? If Yeshua repeats and teaches ONLY that which is commanded to Moses, why were they going to have a problem knowing 'the word spoken as commands by God' from this future prophet?

BECAUSE HE ISN'T REPEATING TORAH GIVEN MOSES!!

He is speaking commands in the name of God that if not followed equal death. "But how will we know if the word he speaks if from God???"

The one law answer, it's already written in the Torah given Moses. The answer from Torah, 'If what he says does not pass, he is not of God and you can ignore him'. Funny, why doesn't it state 'if what he says does not refer back to what was already spoken he is a liar and worthy of death'????

This is great video by Nanos...

Paul And the Jewish Tradition - YouTube

 

[Lulav]

If it appears that I said that, then I was misunderstood. I even posted a video interview with Rabbi Chernoff of the MJAA. He says the same thing, that Gentiles are 'spiritually' part of Israel. I'll see if I can find the video.

The law of Moses is the constitution for Israel which sets Israel apart. The stranger that sojourns among us although there are laws that are universal, there are laws that are only for children of Abraham , Isaac and Jacob.

So it is a physicality that makes one Jewish?

How do you view second or third generation Jews that believe in Messiah? Are they still physically Jews or are they now neither Jew nor Gentile but a class all their own?

 

[Messianic Jewboy]

So it is a physicality that makes one Jewish?

How do you view second or third generation Jews that believe in Messiah? Are they still physically Jews or are they now neither Jew nor Gentile but a class all their own?

A child of Israel in the flesh is one that is circumcised IN THE FLESH according to Gen 17...If there are no fleshly Children of Israel then there can be no promise of Messiah to the Children of Israel who have Not Yet come to BELIEF IN Messiah Yeshua BY FAITH.

Paul says a true Jew per se is one that is circumcised in the flesh AND circumcised in the heart.