Commandments for Gentiles?

[Yahudim]

You guys are just too good! You caught my meaning without any help at all.

Thanks David! I was going to PM you and ask, but I suddenly got bold and decided to take a stab at it.

 

[mishkan]

Thanks David! I was going to PM you and ask, but I suddenly got bold and decided to take a stab at it.

It is always easier to understand when one is not operating out of a competitive spirit. Unity of spirit goes a long way towards clear and peaceful sharing of views, even when there are differences of opinion.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

By the way, I followed the links you posted in http://www.christianforums.com/t7712965-7/#post62193974 and many of them link to discussions and teachings of Torah non-observance.

Not really - no more than it's "non observance" to discuss why you don't eat locusts according to the Law or why others don't go through purification laws/become circumcised when it comes to Passover and many other things where the Torah noted certain groups were not called to Observe specific things as others. If truly studying Torah, that has to be consistent - all of that within the spirit of seeing that MJ is Torah positive.


This all goes back to the central issue of not judging the observances of others who are not where you feel you're at - and respecting differences in Torah Observance. Per SoP:

No. 1: (Torah)...this can be an area of great division with much misunderstanding, so we must realize that we are all at different points in our walk and that the Ruach Elohim (the Spirit of God) will lead people to The Truth. We realize that not all Messianics have equal levels of Torah observance. The disputes concerning this matter will not be tolerated.

And this was already discussed before rather clearly in Messianic Judaism? when the subject was addressed by the mods/others ( #161 , #163 , #167 , #175 , #208 , #210 , #212 , #224 , #253 , #265 , #277 , #284 , #290 , #291 , and #486 ). What Messianic Judaism at large has consistently taught is that Yeshua's death through the cross meant there was no longer any dividing barrier between Jew and Gentile, but that all would have access to God in the same way – and that was without Torah.

Romans 3:21
But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. (New International Version)


​

The phrase “apart from the law” here in Greek is χωρὶς νόμου, “without law.” The righteousness of God that Paul preached was without the Torah. He said it so often and in so many ways that it should be clear enough. This does not mean that the Torah is of no consequence, nor does it mean that Gentiles cannot learn from it - but it does mean directly is that any type of observance of it cannot be done from the perspective of thinking one's "more" or "less" pleasing to the Lord because of it....and, as noted earlier, judging others on their level of observance as if you or anyone else is on the perfect level. Where ever the Lord leads is what matters since all are on a different journey - and all observance is to be done in remembrance of Yeshua - the one who brought true justification/righteousness and that all of the Law points to as the Sum of it.

Any compulsion to Torah-observance by others would strangulate the grace which we have as a free gift from Messiah.

Since this is banned by the SoP, I thought I would let you know. I wouldn't want you to get in trouble.

Already aware of it as are others - for it was already discussed before - specifically in the SoP when it comes to people being at differing levels - and, for that matter (on the bottom of it ), not doing things in the name of Torah Observance that go against what the SoP notes at the bottom of the page when it comes to the SITE wide rules of not making false claims of Christians or Christianity which is mocking (i.e. Claiming "CHristians don't keep Mosaic Law", Claiming "Messianics Keep the Torah, Christians don't!", etc.) when it comes to views that others are not as observant as people deem necessary.

This goes directly in line with what was noted when it was asked for no posting in the Faith Group forums reserved for Christians/debating against them as a Non-Christian. You should know that as well - although pushing against it really isn't a good idea.

#283

It's not nessessary to agree with all Christian doctrine to post on this site. That is not practical and in fact impossible.... You do need to have a belief in Jesus(Yeshua his Hebrew name) to be MJ and In this forum cannot teach against the nicene creed

I agree with her. Prayerfully, you can as well And in the event it was forgotten, as the mods/several other members have noted:
:

Originally Posted by Avodat

The rules say, at No. 1: (Torah)...this can be an area of great division with much misunderstanding, so we must realize that we are all at different points in our walk and that the Ruach Elohim (the Spirit of God) will lead people to The Truth. We realize that not all Messianics have equal levels of Torah observance. The disputes concerning this matter will not be tolerated.

and we have an 'Everything Torah!' thread, so why has this thread got so violent?

​

Originally Posted by ContraMundum

house rules don't allow for the judging of other's level of observance. It had to be said. We are all different. Some keep the Feast etc very faithfully, others go further, others cut and paste as they grow and move along. The fact that someone could rage about it being a problem shows a lack of respect for those who are doing their best on the path to seek out living a life pleasing to God.

​

I still have a hard time understanding what exactly “Torah observance” – and other such terms – really means here. It’s so generic that it doesn’t carry any specific meaning, and I think that’s what causes problems. If someone suddenly claims that keeping the Torah includes cutting the foreskin off of your own son (rather than having a mohel do it, since mohalim are not mentioned in the Torah), would it be “anti-Torah” to state that this is not how it should be done? After all, Abraham (not a doctor) circumcised his own household and Moses himself (not a doctor) cut the foreskin of his son, Gershom. Does opposing oddball practices that have nothing to do with Torah observance itself push someone over the line into “anti-Torah” argumentation?

I agree. In other practical examples, when the repsonse come on certain topics of examination on what actually happened in TOrah - that is all focused on being Torah Positive/TOrah Observant. Noting where others did not do certain things (be it Esther eating the food given to her in Persia/not lining up with Kosher meals while Daniel asked for special food) is NOT a matter of being non-Torah Observant since it's all about of the Torah/God's law.

Talking on how Paul did not advocate for Gentiles to ever be required to keep Kosher within Jewish fellowships or any other synagouge since the Lord did not call them to such is not a matter of being non-Torah observant since the Torah itself stated such directly and forcefullly. What often happens is that honest discussion on what Gentiles are called/meant to do according to Torah and seeing what Yeshua did on a number of occassions is wrongly assumed to be "Torah non-Observance" when it doesn't line up with an ideology of what Torah is - and that's not being honest on what actually is recorded in the Torah itself. If others wish to take issue with that and report, it can just as easily be equally reported that they themselves are not really dealing with the Torah on its own terms and seeing what it defines as positive Torah involvement.

Interesting that non Torah observance can be seen as Torah obvervance according to the Torah depending on how one looks at it.

Originally Posted by Avodat

House Rules:
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here:
http://www.christianforums.com/rules/#faq_rule_0
In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic and subject to staff action. __________________

Congregational Forum Restrictions, Christian Only Forums, and Off-Topic posts
Do not teach or debate in any Congregational Forum unless you are truly a member and share its core beliefs and teachings. Questions and fellowship are allowed, proselytizing is not.

Do not post in the forums reserved for Christians only, unless you are truly a Nicene Creed, Trinitarian Christian (please see our Statement of Faith to know exactly what that is). If you wish to discuss unorthodox doctrines, you may do so in Unorthodox Theology.

Respect and become familiar with each forum's Statement of Purpose. .


​

.

​

The remark in that post, "and simply don't like what you get (Proverbs 14:6)", is probably against the rules too.
[/quote]Not really seeing it as anymore different than it is when you've noted that others don't understand God's law because they don't wish to understand - and noting where things come easily to people who are discerning (as the scripture notes) is something many have brought up before in regards to discussions/having what they say understood clearly because people honestly wanted to understand ..in contrast to people who have shown a history of choosing to not take serious every word you offer - for they don't understand what's said because they don't seek it seriously, whereas people who pay attention/truly want to know where you're coming from get it quickly.

Nothing more, nothing less.

It certainly feels like a personal put down. I'm not feeling the love you say you're giving, G. Maybe you should take a break until you feel better. We can pick this up later if you like

I'm rather good, actually God is faithful and living life with my Messianic Jewish family (both online and at home ) is a blessing. As it concerns here, pretense is never something that surprises me or something I take seriously so long as it's condoned - and thus, as said before, I'm not really concerned with picking anything - for as said before (here, here and here), you've already made plain what you feel - both here and on MD (Miskan David), with it being direct/clear...from feeling others are not "Observant enough" in your view, to viewing others as "breakers of Torah/God's law!!" (as was said to Contra direclty and as he made very known) to the discussion of name connotations and a host of other things.

It wouldn't take much to begin posting things verbatim from what you've said on that and people are not ignorant on that fact (although it's not necessary) - and people are well aware of it. So no need acting as such here when it comes to any claim of "feeling love." What you've said here and elsewhere to others and about others is already evidence enough that love really isn't in view

Unless, of course, one's willing to put up directly what they have said elsewhere verbatim - and own up to it/renounce it. If not, however, there's nothing really to be said. And as Contra noted best:

consensus has remained to try to be gracious to one another. Perhaps the real problem here is that there was a conspiracy to disrupt this forum, and at least one person has publically admitted to it. Obviously these self-admitted Torah observant folks who were part of this woeful disturbance haven't learned the concept of shalom bayis- which is Torah, at least to me and most likely the other Jews here.

So, how about this: when Tal gets back, let's run a thread on the necessity of living the heart of the Torah. Then Tal can participate in the tikkun here, which I think would be a sign of good faith.

​

Good advice, IMHO

 

[Lulav]

Not according to Yeshua - who worked with Gentiles all the time - and never asked or required that they had to be involved in the Mosaic Covenant for sanctification or justification before the Lord anymore than it was with Noah.

Could you please give references to back up the claim that Yeshua worked with Gentiles all the time? And where the subject of them being justified or sanctified before the L-RD came into play?

Also what does Noah have to do with this?

Oh, I'd appreciate this in 50 words or less.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

And yet you ignore that His message was to the Jews FIRST. It is not like He did not command it for the goyim. In fact He did just that (instruct that His Torah be taken to the nations) after giving the Jews a chance to accept His ministry FIRST.

Incorrect - and, as said before, the responses given are an indicator that one doesn't choose to listen before they respond because they are not really reading for understanding. For I already addressed that squarely in #11 in-depth when noting how Yeshua came First for the Jew and later for the Gentile - just as Paul noted it in Romans 2-3.


No need responding to an caricature of argument I never supported - for that's like chasing/attacking windmills and calling them giants. And seriously, IMHO, I think it'd really behoove you to either research before making claims and keep up - or perhaps not say anything at all if you're looking to make issues out of nothing. Choosing to calm down before writing can make a world of difference - and the same goes for ASKING if someone has spoken on something before assuming they didn't.


And as said before, nowhere in scripture do you have it - at ANY point - where Yeshua told the Gentiles they had to essentially become like the Jews at ALL points (including the Covenant God specically gave to them ) in order to be accepted before the Lord. That goes back to how often Torah is misunderstood because they don't know the context of "Torah"/instruction Yeshua was talking of.

He did not tell the man in Gerasenes in Mark 5 to get circumcised - nor did he tell him to become an Israelite. And he didn't tell Samaritans in John 4 to stop being Samaritan when he preached to the woman at the Well and started a revival. And he didn't tell the Roman Centurion in Luke 7:1-11 ( a God-Fearer) to start keeping the Feasts in order to have true faith in the Lord. There's no way around that if one's to be consistent with the whole of the Gospel - and, for that matter, the Apostles.

What did Messiah instruct His talmidim to do?
After He preached to the Jews?
After He was rejected by the Jews?
After He was persecuted by the Jews?
After He was turned over to the Romans for execution by the Jews?
After He was buried?
After He was resurrected?
After He appeared to His talmidim?
After He appeared to the multitudes?

Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you...

Hooray - and as Yeshua noted, what He commanded them to teach was to love one another/look to Him for salvation and follow His example of ministry. Nothing of what you said remotely shows where His commands included proclaiming to all Gentiles they had to keep all parts of the Mosaic Law given to the Hebrews or that they were not sanctified where they were.

Y'shua IS Torah. He was the epitome of Torah observant. That is what He taught His talmidim to be - correctly observant. So explain to me why would He instruct His talmidim to instruct 'all nations' (goyim) to observe 'all things' that He commanded (Torah)?
Because Torah was optional for goyim?Or because all those that believe on Him and follow Torah become adopted into His family and grafted into Israel - just like His talmidim taught?

All things HE commanded - not all things commanded in the Mosaic Code (otherwise He'd also be advocating for all Gentiles to do sacrifices for atonement/cleansing and saying that Gentiles themselves were required to circumcise their children.

As said before, He did not tell the man in Gerasenes in Mark 5 to get circumcised - nor did he tell him to become an Israelite. And he didn't tell Samaritans in John 4 to stop being Samaritan when he preached to the woman at the Well and started a revival. And he didn't tell the Roman Centurion in Luke 7:1-11 ( a God-Fearer) to start keeping the Feasts in order to have true faith in the Lord. There's no way around that if one's to be consistent with the whole of the Gospel - and, for that matter, the Apostles.

And He CERTAINTLY did not mince words when it came to the parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10:25-39 - showing that someone who was deemed to not be like the Jews in how they deemed "observance by the Mosaic" was justified in the eyes of the Lord simply by loving others/doing the Spirit of the Law to begin with - loving justice/mercy and compassion. This was also echoed by Paul in Romans 2-3 - and Paul even noted it when discussing how Yeshua is the one in whom we're justified.

Romans 2:12-24
12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law,15 since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) 16 This will take place on the day when God will judge men’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

17 Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and brag about your relationship to God; 18 if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; 19 if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, 20 an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of infants, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— 21 you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 22 You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24 As it is written: “God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”[b]
2
5 Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. 26 If those who are not circumcised keep the law’s requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? 27 The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the[c] written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.

28 A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise is not from men, but from God.
​

Romans 3:4

....10 As it is written:

“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”[c]
13 “Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit.”[d]
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”[e]
14 “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”[f]
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 ruin and misery mark their ways,
17 and the way of peace they do not know.”[g]
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”[h]
​

19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

Righteousness Through Faith

21 But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 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— 26 he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.




​

In the Gospel of John when the Samaritan woman believed in Jesus, she immediately went back to her community, told them what He had done for her, and led many others to Jesus (John 4.39-42). Notice that the woman is referred to as a Samaritan throughout the entire passage and process. Samaritans in first century Palestine were viewed as heretical half-breed Jews. They even hand their own religious practices and holy sights. They and the Jews were enemies, yet in all of Jesus’ interactions with her he never asked her to leave her religion – even though her spiritual identity has been transformed. Why?

We see a similar story in Jesus’ interaction with the Gerasene demoniac in Mark 5. After Jesus healed the demoniac he begged Jesus to let him enter his boat and follow him. Surprisingly, Jesus said NO! Jesus wouldn’t let the man follow him. Instead, he sent him away, back to his homeland. Why?

In both of these Biblical scenes the ‘why?’ question is answered in the second half of the story. With the Samaritan woman we see her go back to her village and proclaim the good news of Jesus with everyone she encounters. As the result many Samaritans come to believe in Jesus (John 4:39). Her witness was not based on her conversion to ‘Christianity,’ it was centered on her life changing encounter with Jesus.

With the Gerasene demoniac a similar thing occurs.

As Jesus sent him away he said, “Go home to your own people and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you.” (Mark 5:19). The next time Jesus came to the region, there were some 4,000 others waiting to hear from Him (Mark 8.1). Surely this man played a key role in creating this second scene by his faithful witness. In both stories one profound encounter with Jesus was enough preparation to proclaim the good news of the kingdom. Samaritans remained Samaritan, Gentiles remained Gentile, and Jews remained Jewish. The central question was not “What is your religion?” but “Who do you say that Jesus is?”

Paul’s ministry followed the same pattern. In 1 Cor. 7.17, he writes, “Let each person lead the life that the Lord has assigned to him, and to which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches.” He gives three specific examples of this: married/unmarried (a social identity category), circumcised/uncircumcized (a religious identity category), and slave/free (an economic identity category). In each, writes Paul that each “should remain in the situation in which God called you” (7:17,20,24). Paul’s practice aligns with Jesus’ method.

All of these examples raise a profound question that must be addressed: Can a person remain within his/her culture and religion after they begin to trust Jesus? Let’s look at Judaism as an example: How and why can someone remain within Judaism when it is a religion that demand works for salvation? The answer, according to Paul in Gal. 6.15, is that the new believer has become, in Christ, a new creation in the midst of his old circumstance.

This means, of course, that some practices will have to be rejected, some retained, and others transformed according to the righteousness demanded within the Kingdom of God.


If we're going to deal with the Torah and Yeshua, we need to deal with it accurately. Whether you like it or not. For to be truly Torah Observant as Yeshua is to follow HIS example - not how we'd like Him to be - and He made clear what He expected of Gentiles as well as Jews. It is a erroneous doctrine claiming that being adopted into Israel means living like the Jews at all points - and to do so opens the door for Replacement Theology when people begin to assume they're more "observant' than other Jews disagreeing ...even though they're Gentile...and then they proclaim that their adoption into Israel means they are bound to act the same as Hebrews. That is a old false teaching which the early body of believers had to deal with repeatedly - paticularly in the form of the Ebionites and what they emphasized.

It is what it is...

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Could you please give references to back up the claim that Yeshua worked with Gentiles all the time?

And where the subject of them being justified or sanctified before the L-RD came into play?

Already did - as said before in #11 (as well as #146, #77 and #75 )... as it's not difficult to understand that working often with Gentiles is something Yeshua did just like the Early Jewish community witnessed. Obviously, that doesn't mean every single day or in a predominate way since He came FIRST for the Jews and later for Gentiles (noted earlier in the thread). And the subject of them being justified was already shared a couple of pages back.

Also what does Noah have to do with this?

Again, already shared - as did Hiliel who noted the issue in regards to the standards Noah was given and how that was what Gentiles were under. It was a well-known school of thought in the world of the Pharisees, L - and you and I have actually been involved in conversation on the matter before ..specifically as it concerned the Apostle Paul being the 12th disciple replacement (as seen here in #162 , #74 and #57 )

Acts 15 discusses the assertion by some believers that a man must be circumcised in order to be saved. The conclusion of the Apostles and Elders (Acts 15:20), under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, was to lay upon the Gentiles only four requirements:

• to avoid fornication​

• to avoid idolatry​

• to avoid eating blood

• to avoid eating that which is strangled.​

​

As has been noted, these are very similar to the Noahide laws. This does not mean that Gentiles are free to murder, steal, and dishonor their parents. The passage assumes a universal morality, as do Paul, Peter, and James (who were present that day), and John in their writings. As Romans 2 notes, Gentiles can perceive the law of God, even without the revelation of Moses, and are responsible for many standards that are also expressed in the Bible. For example, classic Roman moral law taught the ideals of monogamous marriage, honoring parents, honesty and much

And in the event that is not detailed enough for clarity (and you can stop reading past this point if you feel it was already understood well enough)

Acts 15:20, 29

. . . that you abstain from meat that has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what has been strangled and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from doing these things, you will do well. Farewell (Acts 15:29).

​

(1) The prohibition against eating blood is NOT from the Mosaic law. It is from Genesis 9:2-4, which obviously predates Mosaic law. This is a universal prohibition for the entire human race and for all time. (If you try to argue that it is not, you must also argue that the prohibition against murder is not.)

(2) According to Genesis 9:3-4, blood is not food. It does not say that blood is a forbidden food; it says that blood is not food (for, just as God defined food in Genesis 1:29 as plant matter, here He defines food as plant matter and animal flesh, excluding blood).

(3) Whenever one bleeds an animal killed for meat, he has fulfilled the command of Genesis 9 not to eat meat with the blood. (By the way, eating a rare steak is not sin, as long as the meat was properly bled when it was slaughtered. A small amount of blood always remains in meat even after bleeding. Further, cooking meat so that it no longer appears red does not remove the tiny bit of blood that remains – it simply changes its color.) To put it more precisely, in Genesis 9 God forbids the INTENTIONAL eating of blood – either by extracting blood and drinking it, or by intentionally leaving it in meat slaughtered for consumption. This is because “the life is in the blood” (Leviticus 17:11). There is something fundamentally wrong with eating what still has the life in it. This is related to the whole concept of sacrifice that is so central to Christ’s redeeming work, for in the spilling of blood there is the taking of life. It is also one of the reasons why many pagan religions advocate the eating of blood. There was actually an entire pagan theology of eating one’s enemies in order to absorb their life-force - and that occurred all over the world, especially in Latin American cultures like the Mayans or the Aztecs...

(4) Fornication is also something that God universally prohibits, though it is more difficult to find this in Scripture by chapter and verse. Genesis 2:24 essentially establishes the only context in which sexual relations are approved by God: marriage. This is not a merely Mosaic regulation; it is universally binding on all of mankind. It is clear that God forbids fornication (i.e. sexual immorality – any kind of sex outside of marriage) even among pagans. Again, the prohibition against fornication is not a Mosaic prohibition, but a universal one.

(5) Idolatry is obviously also something that God universally forbids. This hardly needs to be supported (and one can go to Romans 1:22-25 for just one example).

(6) The conclusion is clear. The four things prohibited in the Acts 15 letter are all NON-MOSAIC, universal regulations. They are, and always have been, universally binding on all humans. They are, however, also strongly emphasized in Mosaic law. Pagan society in the first century was woefully unaware of these universal regulations – except through the teaching of the Hebrew Scriptures (hence James’ comment in Acts 15:21). When the Jerusalem church agreed that Mosaic regulations should not be imposed on the Gentile believers, they recognized that with the rejection of Mosaic regulations as binding on Gentile Christians, it might be understood that the prohibitions against idolatry, eating blood, eating strangled meat, and fornication should also be thrown out, as they were only generally known through Mosaic law. The church was careful to restate these regulations not because they wanted to avoid scandalizing Jewish believers, but because they were and are and always will be universally binding on all mankind. They did not want to appear to be condoning what God had universally condemned.


The only requirement placed on the Gentile believers was that they “abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication” (verse 25). The problem seems to be in what the Jerusalem Council did not say about Jewish practice. The Jerusalem elders probably clarified the fact that Jewish Christians could continue to keep the law, not as a means to salvation, but as an expression of love and obedience.

They could delight in the law, not because it gave them any merit or standing before God, but because it had been fulfilled in Christ, and because they were now righteous in God’s sight. The standards of righteousness which the law upheld were now no longer a cause of fear, but the basis for rejoicing and worship. They once were frustrated by their own failure to fulfill the laws demands, but now they rejoiced because Christ had fulfilled the entire law and they were not under the curse. And the kingdom to which the Old Testament saint looked forward was a certainty, which Jewish and Gentile saints would receive together (see Hebrews 11:39-40).

Paul’s very strong words in the Book of Galatians were addressed to those who would impose the law and law-keeping on Gentile believers, not toward those who were true believers and who wished, as Jewish Christians, to continue to live in accordance with the law and to observe Old Testament rituals. It was one (damnable) thing for Judaisers to insist that Gentile saints must keep the law in order to be saved, and quite another for Jewish Christians to keep the law because they were saved. Even Gentiles were not turned away from the law, but were enabled to fulfill its requirements:

Romans 8:1-4
​

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit .
​

Oh, I'd appreciate this in 50 words or less.

I'd appreciate it if you made all your comments in 10 words or less But as I know that's not gonna happen, I'll take you as you are - even when it has gone well beyond 100 or more - and likewise, take what you get just as others do the same for you on what you give out

 

[visionary]

How does one worship the Father?

John 4:21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

How does someone worship the Creator and Redeemer? Is it not by the obedience to Laws?

Revelation 14:7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

For it is how we will be judged as to whom we worship, not by just calling out his name, but by obedience.... Faith without works ....

 

[anisavta]

working often with Gentiles is something Yeshua did

Would you be specific and site references to this?
He did meet a few Gentiles where they were and ministered to a few, but "working often"?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Would you be specific and site references to this?

I did - outside of the examples I gave when he was in Gentile territory or working with Samaritans. And for more info, I already gave out reference info here in #11 in-depth when noting how Yeshua came First for the Jew and later for the Gentile - just as Paul noted it in Romans 2-3. To be clear, as noted earlier, the phrase "worked often" is within the context of how it was not a rare thing for Yeshua interact with Gentiles. If a better word could've been used, cool...but that was the backdrop I was coming from.

 

[anisavta]

EZ I don't have time to spend hours on this forum reading your novels. For those of us who like more conversation and less lecture - could you just state your facts and jot down a few references in a paragraph or two?

 

[Yahudim]

G, your longest posts are repetition of your conclusions. But repeating it does not make it true.

You shortest posts are in response to specific requests for scriptural evidence.

If pressed, you claim that it has already been discussed and settled, then proceed to repeat the same posts with your conclusions without truly engaging in discussion. So nothing is really settled.

The proof of this is all the other posters in this thread. Most of us don't agree with you. Most of us can't even figure out what you are saying. You seem to run in circles.

Do you think you can summarize any of this? We would love to address your position one point at a time without all the broad sweeping generalizations.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

EZ I don't have time to spend hours on this forum reading your novels.?

Hardly a novel, Ani (and that'd be exaggeratory)- as a novel can be anywhere from 200 to over 400 pages and what was given in reference is less than a middle school essay. If you want reference, deal with it - but if you don't want to address it (despite where others have), that's on you. No need for excuses on why you can't deal with that which is easy to deal with.

Everyone has time to do things - and it doesn't take hours to read through that which takes people only a couple of minutes.

those of us who like more conversation and less lecture - could you just state your facts and jot down a few references in a paragraph or two?

Respectfully, Ani..

For those who are not for that (and there've been several), it is not going to be the case that they (whom I'm concerned with) are going to be avoided because you do not prefer it.

There've already been multiple postings given with a paragraph or two - and even that much was skipped over...and at times, dismissed for a myriad of reasons. Others have shown far for more concern for dealing with things as they are - and they've never seen it as a "lecture"/have noted such. Moreover, if you're going to speak on preferring "conversation" over "lecture", perhaps it'd be good to consider how often you tend to come off as in lecture mode when telling others your mind. It doesn't matter whether something is short or long in that regards.

It is what it is

 

[Gxg (G²)]

G, your longest posts are repetition of your conclusions. But repeating it does not make it true.

You shortest posts are in response to specific requests for scriptural evidence.

If pressed, you claim that it has already been discussed and settled, then proceed to repeat the same posts with your conclusions without truly engaging in discussion. So nothing is really settled.

The proof of this is all the other posters in this thread. Most of us don't agree with you. Most of us can't even figure out what you are saying. You seem to run in circles.

Do you think you can summarize any of this? We would love to address your position one point at a time without all the broad sweeping generalizations.

Cute - but as said before, it hardly does anything in showing yourself any different - nor does it come close to addressing God's Word. By the logic you use, bringing up the same questions/postings as you did here and in multiple other threads means it should be dismissed - as others have done - since repeating something doesn't make it more true than before.

As it is, you already have ZERO to talk on in length since you've done the same thing - consistently and for years (#1, #2, #3, #4, #18 #25, #43 , #44 , #45 , #47 #48 ) - and if unable to own up to that, one really doesn't care to deal with things as they are as opposed to how they would like it to be when they wish to make issues out of nothing. You've done the same thing on other forums as well - so there's no need for "Do as I say, not as I do" ideology. That'd be inconsistent.

Other posters in a thread feeling one way is no more "proof" than having a bunch of people from GT established as "proof" when a small groups whines about how others keep using Jewish names for Biblical characters - and there've already been DOZENS of other posters directly disagreeing with each/every one of the people who want to have an issue (i.e. Messianic Mommy, COntranMundum, Shimshon David, Zazal, sevengreenbeans, JRSut1000 , ChavaK , Dpiiiius , Yusuphhai , SGM4HIM , Laureate and a host of others.). They have all interacted in the same way - and noted appreciation for it since they understand it/have no issue. They've also all noted how often you and others - despite where you allow it for yourselves/those you deem worthy - do the SAME things on repeated occassions...and then ignore as if it never happened.

Not dealing with that - as it's selective memory of events and not a matter of concern for accuracy or real concern. Like I said before, if you do not like a style, GET OVER IT. People do the same for you when they don't prefer your responses the way you like to give them - and thus, you should learn how to give the same freedom to others.


People are not concerned with writing solely for you - nor is it the case that not preferring it means ALL others have even come close to thinking the same as you....and I don't write for you anyhow. Never have - and as you already did not show enough consideration to guard your words when blasting several believers on the forums, there's really little concern as to whether or not you enjoy a style of writing. That goes for others who've also been called out on the same thing by other posters.

It doesn't really matter whether you "get" anything - as most of the people you speak of (yourself included) have already noted a host of things MOST of Messianic Judaism has never suscribed to. Most of you don't consider yourself Christians - despite the fact that you're on Christian Forums made explictly for Christians. Most of you are advocating views that have long been on the fringes of the Church and Messianic Judaism - paticularly One Law (as pushed by Gentile Messianics focused on Observance) - and most of you that agree with each other are on apart of forums that advocate things much of Messianic Judaism has never supported.....nor the early body of believers.

As often as you claim others run in circles, it has been noted of you that you don't really seem to say anything outside of that which is circular logic. The same goes for the repeated amount of times you have made broad sweeping generalizations of others in Christianity or those who are not in agreement with your ideals of observance.


Numerous Messianic Jews have noted this in regards to the handful of others tripping over silliness - and thus, when it comes to not understanding, I agree with the numerous Messianic Jews who've pointed out it's hard to understand when you're concerned with arguing/proving your point than actually listening properly


If you want to do what is done in youth culture where you have to resort to ad-hominem/personal commentary rather than focusing on the post (already against the rules) rather than credibly deal with an issue - or selectively excusing yourself when you've already done the same and several others noted it - that is your choice.. Simple as that

 

[visionary]

Hardly a novel, Ani - as that's over 400 pages and what was given is less than a middle school essay. If you want reference, deal with it - but if you don't want to address it (despite where others have), that's on you. No need for excuses on why you can't deal with that which is easy to deal with

So much for curtesy requested.... why post then? Is it not for dialogue purposes.

 

[macher]

Cute, seeing that others already noted the tendency you already showed - both here and MD - to declare others as outside the kingdom of God when they disagree with you. But of course, selective argumentation often happens without people realizing it.

That said, when you live up to the standard you are demanding of others, then you can talk. Till then, it is a matter of unbalanced scales - and God has never been pleased with that, v.

The point I'm want to make is, if you believe in a 'doctrine' then live it. But just because one doesn't believe, practice that doctrine, it doesn't mean they live outside the Kingdom of God.

 

[Yahudim]

G, we are all making requests, not excuses. The requests are simple. You say you want to show His love, here is your opportunity. If you aren't afraid, let's deal with your concerns one or two points at a time. We can then put them to bed and move on to the next.


Please?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

G, we are all making requests, not excuses.

And all others who've disagreed with you have also made requests -from Contra to Shimshon to Qnts2 and several others - respecting differing styles/focusing on those you agree with in regards to Torah. That was the consensus - as it concerns love for others/respect.

Thus far, you didn't honor it - or the SoP with the focus on judging others in their observance - and the same goes with Christians, alongside things said at MD that most are aware of...and that you've yet to change alongside others.

Again, if you can't even change on that regards and you're still trying to justify where you've already done the same - counter to the request you're making (with all the same people keeping quiet/celebrating it because it agreed - as seen in #1, #2, #3, #4, #18 #25, #43 , #44 , #45 , #47 and #48 ), there's really little room to talk. Unless, of course, you're going to delete all postings made over 1,000 words and have everyone of your postings at below a paragraph.

You say you want to show His love, here is your opportunity. If you aren't afraid, let's deal with your concerns one or two points at a time.

You've already been given the opportunity, T - and as several others have noted, love is not tolerating that which is not necessary. Others show love by giving people freedom/space - and the same is the case here. No more, no less...and nothing different than what many Messianic Jews/Messianic Gentiles have said for a long time.

That said, it's rather baseless talking about people being afraid when it has already been the case (as it was before with others you did the same with ) that you've avoided scripture 10 times already - whereas others have covered each thing you wrote point for point.

Frankly, if you're really concerned with dealing with what was said, one can deal with it as it is - and stop making excuses for why you cannot. I doubt it, of course...as you have made plain that you don't read what was said by myself and have specified such before - whether it be here or on MD (and anyone choosing to PM can easily get the direct references for direct evidence). Why you act as if nothing was said is a bit fanciful - but now's your chance to show you were really concerned for others.

• Start by erasing what you've said toward ContraMundum.
• Start by apologizing to him for the ways he and several others were misrepresented (as he already noted here/on MD - #326, #330/ #470 )
• Start by honoring the OP in learning how to agree to disagree /agreeably and stop judging everyone not observing as you do as "Non Observant"- as well as choosing to address postings rather than personal commentary on posters...or claiming things of Christians/Christianity which are not held central and other Christians have noted.

You're choice (and anything less is disengenuous posting )....but if you can't do that, it's rather hollow talking on anything since one is simply spinning for the sake of argument...and most are aware of that

 

[Lulav]

Already did - as said before in #11 (as well as #146, #77 and #75 )... as it's not difficult to understand that working often with Gentiles is something 11did just like the Early Jewish community witnessed. Obviously, that doesn't mean every single day or in a predominate way since He came FIRST for the Jews and later for Gentiles (noted earlier in the thread). And the subject of them being justified was already shared a couple of pages back.

You're kidding, right? Your #11 link goes to an entirely different Thread, this thread you are posting in right here is called
Commandments for Gentiles?


Your #11 is to one called Can you help me understand something better which
1. Is Closed
2. I never posted on it nor even read it.


#146 is Again, from another thread other than this one, called Body of Christ (Church) vs. Israel

And Ironically closed also, I don't remember posting in there either.

#75 and 77 are from
Judaeo, Judaic, Judaizers, Judaize, Judaism

Do you honestly think we read or remember every single post you made so we can figure out what you are referring to in another thread? That's incredible.

Again, already shared - as did Hiliel who noted the issue in regards to the standards Noah was given and how that was what Gentiles were under. It was a well-known school of thought in the world of the Pharisees, L

I'd appreciate it if you made all your comments in 10 words or less But as I know that's not gonna happen, I'll take you as you are - even when it has gone well beyond 100 or more - and likewise, take what you get just as others do the same for you on what you give out

And just which thread did you 'share' your standards of Noah?

I highly doubt that Yeshua taught the Noachide laws of the Hassidim.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

The point I'm want to make is, if you believe in a 'doctrine' then live it. But just because one doesn't believe, practice that doctrine, it doesn't mean they live outside the Kingdom of God.

Thank you for noting that - as too often that has occurred and it is rather foolish whenever it does come up.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

You're kidding, right? Your #11 link goes to an entirely different Thread, this thread you are posting in right here is called
Commandments for Gentiles?
.

And what was said elsewhere was already in agreement with what was noted here. No different than what you've already done - for there's no need trying to reinvent the wheel on that.

Your #11 is to one called Can you help me understand something better which
1. Is Closed
2. I never posted on it nor even read it.

#146 is Again, from another thread other than this one, called Body of Christ (Church) vs. Israel

And Ironically closed also, I don't remember posting in there either.

#75 and 77 are from
Judaeo, Judaic, Judaizers, Judaize, Judaism

Inconsequential to what was written, L - and none of it stops you from doing the basic of READING - just as others have done multiple times when being pointed back to discussions that were either older or closed due to age/other reasons. As it is, some of what was noted there was already said here in this thread - and the bottom line reason as to why it was given out was due to REFERENCE being asked for. Not REFERENCe in this thread alone.

Mountains out of molehills...

Such is life

Do you honestly think we read or remember every single post you made so we can figure out

How interesting - as a couple of others tend to remember most of what you or others say as well. Some of it is due to exceptional memory (and I do tend to remember chronologically in order of what people write since I'm actually one of the few that reads EVERYTHING - short or long given, as I'm concerned for detail). For others it's simply a matter of using the SEARCH engine (just as you've done here for discussion or elsewhere on MD when looking up something others have said).

And just which thread did you 'share' your standards of Noah?

Already gave it.

I highly doubt that Yeshua taught the Noachide laws of the Hassidim

That's your right to believe such.