• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Do I have to celebrate Roshashona and Yum Kipur (might've spelled that wrong lol)

Discussion in 'Exploring Christianity' started by Parogar, Oct 3, 2016.

  1. daughterofthemosthigh7

    daughterofthemosthigh7 AGE 52 and as if our votes matter!

    +1,259
    Christian
    Celibate
    US-Republican
    Colossians 2:16 & 2:20-23 KJV
    but also see nothing wrong if someone wants to observe Feasts either-- especially for Jewish believers.
     
  2. daughterofthemosthigh7

    daughterofthemosthigh7 AGE 52 and as if our votes matter!

    +1,259
    Christian
    Celibate
    US-Republican
    Funny 1st part-- and "like" second part
     
  3. throughfireytrial

    throughfireytrial Truth-Lover Supporter

    +696
    Christian
    Married
    Not so, to observe them is to nullify your salvation in Christ says Galations and it is also written that no one may be saved by observing the LAW. Israel broke the covenant with God and God set it aside and made a new covenant says Hebrews.
     
  4. mark kennedy

    mark kennedy Natura non facit saltum Supporter

    +7,262
    Calvinist
    Single
    US-Democrat
    Paul always maintained his Jewish customs but understand, the Day of Atonement for Christians was the cross. The Tabernacle and the Temple were sanctified in order for God to literally live there, the Holy of Holies was the very presence of God. Once a year the high priest would go in and make atonement for the nation. In Christ, Jesus is our great high priest who has entered heaven:

    Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has ascended into heaven, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin. Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need. (Hebrew 4:14-16)​

    Before the Temple was destroyed God and the Shekinah glory left the holy of holies, not to return until the Incarnation. The cross is the Yom Kippur, the atonement for sin that puts away sin once and for all. The idea is the moment when the blood was applied to the mercy seat:

    Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation G2435 through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God (Rom 3:25)

    And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; G2435 of which we cannot now speak particularly. (Heb 9:5)​

    The word here in these two passages, translated propitiation and mercy seat is (G2435 ἱλαστήριον hilastērion). The Vine's has an excellent exposition of the word:

    Mercy Seat: "the lid or cover of the ark of the covenant," signifies the Propitiatory, so called on account of the expiation made once a year on the great Day of Atonement, Hbr 9:5. For the formation see Exd 25:17-21. The Heb. word is kapporeth, "the cover," a meaning connected with the covering or removal of sin (Psa 32:1) by means of expiatory sacrifice. This mercy seat, together with the ark, is spoken of as the footstool of God, 1Ch 28:2; cp. Psa 99:5; 132:7. The Lord promised to be present upon it and to commune with Moses "from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim," (Vine's Expository Dictionary)
    If there is something traditional you'd like to do it's perfectly fine but there is certainly no compulsion. Actually every time you take the Lord's Supper you are celebrating our Yom Kippur only for us it's not an annual event, it's once and for all time the blood of Christ taking away the sin of the world.

    Grace and peace,
    Mark
     
  5. ToBeLoved

    ToBeLoved Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,675
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Good info. Thanks.
     
  6. Ken Rank

    Ken Rank Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,468
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    The author of the OP is a new believer who doesn't need all the deep theology and debate at this time. I will share this much... Galatians, when it speaks of returning to the observation of certain days, and months, and times, and years is NOT talking about the Jews... here is the proof:

    Gal 4:8 But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods.
    Gal 4:9 But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage?
    Gal 4:10 You observe days and months and seasons and years.

    The Jews were never not known by God.

    Rom 3:2 Much in every way! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God.

    God entrusted His HOLY WORD with a people who didn't know God or weren't known by God? No... Galatians, at least that portion, is speaking about newly converted pagans who were keeping Saturnalia and other pagan holy day and came to Christ but were drifting back into those pagan days. That was bad. The idea that Passover or the Feast of Tabernacles is bad really speaks poorly of the messiah we call Lord seeing HE KEPT THESE DAYS. If he kept them, they can't be bad nor wrong because he walked out God's will perfectly.

    Whatever one does is between them and God but let's not demean God by referring to things He authored or created as somehow faulty, inferior, or just plain wrong.

    Blessings!
     
  7. mark kennedy

    mark kennedy Natura non facit saltum Supporter

    +7,262
    Calvinist
    Single
    US-Democrat
    Your very welcome, on this your first Yom Kippur in Christ, remember you were not bought by the blood of bulls and goats, but the precious blood of the Lamb. You know, there are some advantages Jewish Christians have according to the New Testament witness. You might find this forum of interest.

    Messianic Judaism

    Years ago one of the best prophecy teachers I think I've ever heard, Neil Lipken, opened up the Scriptures to me in a big way. I think over time you might be able to offer some pretty unique insights into the Scriptures. The following link is his testimony:

    THE DR. NEIL LIPKEN STORY

    Grace and peace,
    Mark
     
  8. mark kennedy

    mark kennedy Natura non facit saltum Supporter

    +7,262
    Calvinist
    Single
    US-Democrat
    It seems to me that practicing traditional Judaism could enhance Christian conviction as long as you realize, the whole Law was fulfilled in Christ. I don't know what Jewish people do on Yom Kippur, whatever it is, it's a shadow of the reality found in Christ.

    Grace and peace,
    Mark
     
  9. Ken Rank

    Ken Rank Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,468
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    We might differ on what the word fulfill means. Matthew 5:17 is taught that fulfill means 'to bring an end to.' But then that verse very much contradicts itself because instead of... and I am paraphrasing for clarify... "I have not been sent to bring an end to the Torah, I have instead come to fulfill it" it would now be translated, "I have not been sent to bring an end to the Torah, I have instead come to bring an end to it."

    An alternative definition of the underlying Greek word is found in Thayer which says, "2c3) to fulfil, i.e. to cause God’s will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God’s promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilment." The idea being that God had a manner in which He wanted things walked out and nobody could do this. So, Yeshua came and one of the MANY things He did was do just that, walk it out to perfection. But not to bring an end to it, but rather, to reveal to those who followed how WE should walk our daily walk. This why Paul wrote that we should follow him as he follows Messiah, and why Peter wrote that Yeshua walk was our model.

    Having said that brother Mark... please do not read into my words, "unto salvation." :) Most do, and I am not even thinking that. We are saved by grace, period. But the saved have expectations placed on them as they learn and grow.

    Blessings.
    Ken
     
  10. throughfireytrial

    throughfireytrial Truth-Lover Supporter

    +696
    Christian
    Married
    Disagree.
    Paul makes it very clear that He is talking about turning back to the LAW and circumcision and all its practices which were destined to perish in Christ. Peter, a Jew, was turning back by refusing to eat with the Gentile converts...LAW...and Paul admonished him publicly for that practice. He, Peter was forcing the gentile believers to observe LAW says Paul. Nearly the entire admonishments of Galations are for Jews to be careful not to return to LAW. We are justified by faith, not the LAW says Paul. You've had several sharp and severe warning passages addressing not only the Jews but all believers cited here already and I'll leave you to review those before you encourage a new convert to continue or revert to LAW.
    I am thoroughly convinced that new converts are required to get this right at any point in their conversion especially when they are asking for Truth...we do not then offer them false teachings.
    And Paul was not as you claim careful to observe all the Jewish practices...hardly...he wrote Galations!
     
  11. Ken Rank

    Ken Rank Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,468
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    I just shared the verses. It says of those in Galatians 4 that they are not known by God and did not know God. But Hebrews says that God entrusted the Jews with His Word. That conflicts unless Galatians isn't speaking about the Jews. Who is Galatians written to? Jews? No... the Gauls.

    Again, Messiah kept the things you are demeaning. The "last supper" was a Passover Seder. My taking part in the SAME DINNER he took part in does NOT nullify my walk with God. These things were designed to teach us about HIM... he said of these things, "they testify of me." Anyway... do them or not... that is between you and God. I was simply leaving an alternative choice for the new believer to consider and pray about. Whatever he chooses or you choose, is between you and God. Blessings.
     
  12. throughfireytrial

    throughfireytrial Truth-Lover Supporter

    +696
    Christian
    Married
    I have read Scripture through and through many times over and I cannot disagree with you more...ALL Scripture is written for ALL Christians! Says Jesus, says Paul, says Scripture...I leave you to a re-read...without all the unknown extra-Biblical helps.
     
  13. Ken Rank

    Ken Rank Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,468
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Ok, have a blessed day. :)
     
  14. mark kennedy

    mark kennedy Natura non facit saltum Supporter

    +7,262
    Calvinist
    Single
    US-Democrat
    Ok we can take a look at that:

    Accomplish, Accomplishment: "to fulfill, to complete, carry out to the full" (as well as to fill), is translated "perfect" in Rev 3:2, AV; RV, "I have found no works of thine fulfilled before My God;" "accomplish" in Luk 9:31. See COMPLETE, END, EXPIRE, FILL, FULFILL, FULL, PREACH. Note: Its strengthened form, ekpleroo, "to fulfill," lit., "fill out," is used in Act 13:33, of the fulfillment of a Divine promise of the resurrection of Christ. ((Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words see G4137 πληρόω plēroō)
    You might want to take another look at that, Matthew uses it throughout his Gospel to speak of fulfilled prophecy (Matt. 2:17, 2:23, 4:14, 8:15, 12:17, 13:35, 21:4, 26:54-56, Matt. 27:9, 27:35).

    Thought you said we have a difference of opinion here, Christ fulfills the Law by providing the righteousness witnessed to in the Law and the Prophets. A righteousness that is by faith:

    This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile. (Rom. 3:22)

    in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. (Rom. 8:4)​

    The difficulties with regards to the Law and the Gospel are as old as Christianity itself. The Jerusalem Council definitively settled the issue as a matter of doctrine, yet our scholars have been arguing over it ever since. I always refer back to justification by grace through faith, which was Peter's argument in Jerusalem answering the Pharisees demand that Gentile believers be circumcised. Now you can make a strong argument that the written code was nailed to the cross, that is readily supported from the New Testament. We can't be righteous be keeping the law, the righteous requirements are fulfill, accomplished and complete in Christ. Destroy and fulfill are two different words, fulfill means to accomplish while destroy (G2647 καταλύω katalyō), Mathew used most often to describe the destruction of the Temple, it means to utterly demolish (Matt. 24:2, Matt. 26:31, Matt. 27:40). He came not to destroy the Law but to accomplish it, the Temple would be demolished and the Church built up of living stones, founded by Christ and the Apostles are the true Temple wherein God dwells. Just like the Temple and Tabernacle of old, only this Temple God never leaves.

    Jesus is our Yom Kippur, our Temple and the Law of God written on our hearts, known and read by all men.

    Grace and peace,
    Mark
     
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2016
  15. mark kennedy

    mark kennedy Natura non facit saltum Supporter

    +7,262
    Calvinist
    Single
    US-Democrat
    double post :)
     
  16. Ken Rank

    Ken Rank Well-Known Member Supporter

    +5,468
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Brother Mark... as you are well aware I am sure, no word has one meaning. Both Thayer and Liddel-Scott (the latter is one of the most respected Greek lexicons ever) include as one possible definition of pleroo "to fulfil, i.e. to cause God’s will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God’s promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilment." Not "fulfill" as in "there is no space left for any more" but rather fulfill in the sense of filling it up, doing it in it's FULLNESS, walking it out "as intended." Like I said before, if the common mainstream understanding is accurate (i.e. pleroo in Matthew 5:17 means done away with, abolish) then that verse literally contradicts itself. Therefore, we cannot use that definition even if that definition is the only one that happens to stand in harmony with our current understanding. That is where I was a decade ago... I realize my position pitted Scripture against Scripture and that isn't how it should be. I found an alternate meaning that stands in harmony not only with the rest of verse 17, but also verses 18 and 19 seeing they would also contradict the common mainstream definition of pleroo.

    If you see it otherwise, that is fine brother, I really am not interested in cloning myself. :)

    Will give me a 3-5 minutes of your time?

    In the days of Messiah, there were TWO sects, two SCHOOLS of Pharisees. One was Beit Hillel (School of Hillel) and it had a slogan... "Spirit of the Law." The other was known as Beit Shamai, or, the School of Shamai. It also had a slogan, "letter of the law." Interestingly this is exactly where the argument that Paul presents between the "letter" and the "spirit" comes from. But, to a degree, I digress.

    Hillel and Shamai engaged in a debate about proselytes. The argument hinged on what was expected of a new convert to Judaism. Hillel's position for the NEW convert, was that he should be expected to "abstain from pollution of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood." Sound familiar? That is "exactly" what came out of the Jerusalem Council. Shamai was more stringent, letter of the law... and his position was ALSO for a new convert to abstain from pollution of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. BUT... he ADDED to that one needed to be circumcised AND recite all 613 commandments. Both men agreed that this was the "beginning of a new converts walk," and that they would learn the rest as they moved forward. Shamai's position was accepted as Halacha (Jewish law) and that was the rule of the day during the time of the Apostles.

    So when we come to Acts 15 we read in verse 1, "And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved." From this, and from understanding that Christianity at THIS TIME was still considered a sect of Judaism... we can discern that these "certain men" were adherents of Shamai. So, Paul and Barnabas get rightly angered, come back and they have the council meeting.

    What happened there? Was ALL doctrine set for gentiles? Of course not... show me "love God" or "love neighbor" or "don't kill" or "refrain from same sex relations." The Acts 15 letter was NOT meant to be the end of the line in terms of doctrine, it was meant to be the starting line. It undid a BAD 50 year old decision and it said, and I am paraphrasing, "do these few things that will set you apart from your pagan brethren and then learn the rest as you go." Remember what came immediately after the letter? Here it is in some context...


    Acts 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned 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. (21) For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

    Don't put too much on them, don't trouble them too much... do these 4 things (two of which modern Christians pay no mind to by the way) and then it says that Moses, an idiomatic reference to Torah (instructions of God) is read every week in the synagogues on the Sabbath. In other words, start with these 4 and then go learn the rest. :)
     
  17. Soyeong

    Soyeong Well-Known Member

    +3,766
    Messianic
    Single
    The problem here is that you have referred to three different categories of laws and are talking about them as if they are the same law. Paul spoke about the law of God (Romans 3:31, 7:22-25, 8:7), the law of sin (Romans 7:23-25), the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2), the law of the Spirit (Romans 8:2), the law of faith (Romans 3:27), the law of righteousness (Romans 9:31), the law of Christ (1 Corinthians 9:21), and works of law (Galatians 3:10), so if you don't correctly distinguish which law he is talking about, then you are not going to correctly understand him.

    For example, in Galatians 5:16-23, everything that is listed as being works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against what the Mosaic law teaches and everything that is listed as being fruits of the Spirit are in accordance with what it teaches, so the principles of the NT are the same as the ones in the OT, mostly because they are based upon God's character, which has not changed. It is talking about a law that is against the Spirit, not a law that was given by the Father, so what sense is there is in interpreting Galatians 5:18 as saying that that if you are led by the Spirit, then you are not under the Mosaic law? Do you think that the Father commanded a law that was against His Spirit or that Christ was in disagreement with the Father about what laws we should obey? No, the Spirit has the role of leading us in obedience to God's law (Ezekiel 36:26-27), Christ said that his teachings were not his own, but that of the Father (John 7:16), and the law that stirs up the works of the flesh that are against the Spirit is the law of sin. This is the same thing that Paul was saying in Romans:

    Romans 6:14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

    It is the law of sin where sin had dominion over us, not God's law. In Romans 7:12-25, Paul said that God's law is holy, righteous, and good, that it is the good that he sought to do and delighted in doing, but contrasted that with a law of sin that stirred up sin and caused him not to do the good that he wanted to do, so the law of sin is opposed to God's law.

    In regard to Galatians 2, there were manmade traditions, customs, or works of law, such as mentioned in Acts 10:28 that forbade Jews from visiting or associating with Gentiles, which actually ran contrary to God's law in same cases, such as with Leviticus 19:34. How are you supposed to love someone as yourself when you are forbidden to visit or associate with them? In Mark 7:6-8, Jesus criticized the Pharisees for setting aside the commands of God in order to follow their own traditions. The group of Jews in Galatians 2 is the same as the one mentioned in Acts 15:1 that wanted Gentiles to follow their customs of Moses in order to become saved, so when Peter followed their tradition by moving to eat with the Jews, he was giving credence to their position and was essentially telling the Gentiles that they weren't saved unless they followed Jewish traditions, which is why Paul immediately reiterated that we are saved by faith. None of the Apostles ever stopped identifying as Jews and Paul still identified as a Pharisee in Acts 23:6.
     
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2016
  18. Soyeong

    Soyeong Well-Known Member

    +3,766
    Messianic
    Single
    The Mosaic law was given because of transgressions to reveal our sin and without it we wouldn't even know what sin is (Romans 7:7), sin is defined as lawless (1 John 3:4), and we are commanded not to do what God has revealed to be sin (Romans 6:15), therefore we are commanded to obey the Mosaic law.
     
  19. mark kennedy

    mark kennedy Natura non facit saltum Supporter

    +7,262
    Calvinist
    Single
    US-Democrat
    An interesting discussion, I always like the historical perspective on these things. Peter said we should not impose a yoke on them that neither our fathers nor we can bear, since the Gentiles are purifying themselves by faith we should put no further burden on them. It was early in the mission to the Gentiles and they would be inundated by terrible heresy and immorality of all kinds, Peter, Jude and Paul all speak to these issues as they emerge. Justification by grace through faith can answer these issues and did.

    Ok, let's look at the result of the Jerusalem Council, the letter sent out as a result. No, not every doctrinal clarity was brought to light in the Council but certainly they addressed many of those things and continued to minister to them:

    But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. (Gal. 5:22,23)​


    I can see you are serious about this and that's good, we do need to take it seriously. Loved the little insights from the doctrine of the Pharisees, I always like learning more about that sort of thing. I think your approaching this from your own perspective and of course we all do. I'll say this though, we do not cast the Mosaic Law behind us by faith in Christ, Christ accomplishes the promise of the Law and the Prophets through faith. I don't think we are that far apart on this, although it might take some time for me to see your perspective on this clearly.

    Grace and peace,
    Mark
     
  20. Soyeong

    Soyeong Well-Known Member

    +3,766
    Messianic
    Single
    Do you think that God's holiness, righteousness, and goodness and the way to act in line with God's character changed between covenants? No, what changed what what priesthood was administering the law, as the context is talking about.

    God's law is His instructions for how to practice righteousness (Romans 7:12, 2 Timothy 3:16-17) and we are told that whomever does not practice righteousness is not of God (1 John 3:10). So we are to practice righteousness because God is righteous, because we are children of God, because He has declared us to be righteous, because He as imputed His righteousness to us for that purpose, because we love God, because we have faith in Him about how we should live, and because that is the example that Christ set for us to follow, but we are not to try to obey God's law in order to become righteous through our own efforts because that would mean that Christ died for nothing.
     
Loading...