Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Let's be as clear as I have been from the beginning. Yahshua rebuked those who put the Talmud over the Torah.
The oral law is the Mishna, is the Talmud. Let's not split hairs here. You know what I'm taking about. Many who don't know what the Mishna is, know of the Talmud.
Peter was sent to Cornelius after receiving his vision correcting his understanding of the Gospel "for all nations". Why would Cornelius NOT be welcomed? He was already a friend of Israel, and not just politically, he was a devout man.
You also said:The point was to clarify history.
-CryptoLutheran
I made no such claimIt was claimed that Cornelius converted to Judaism. Cornelius did not convert to Judaism, he converted to Christianity.
It's not splitting hairs. The Mishnah isn't the Talmud. The Talmud is the Mishnah AND Gemara, the Mishnah is the Mishnah.
And you're accusing me of splitting hairs?
You also said:
Let's also be clear that what Jesus took issue with was not Jewish tradition and practice, but with the abuses of religion; the taking of tradition or practice against the intent of God's purposes, loving justice and mercy, and the use of religion as a wedge and a cudgel.
I was under the impression that clarification of what Yeshua did or did not oppose was at issue.
Specifically, Matthew 15:
3He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ 5 But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God”— 6 then he need not honor his father or mother.’ Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. 7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:
8 ‘These people draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
9 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ ”
Whether this was a written codification, or oral tradition at this point in history, it sounds like they considered it legal. Yeshua seems to disagree.
The Bible includes the gospels and the TaNaK. The gospels are the Bible; but the Bible isn't, say ...Mark. The gospels were the gospels before they were written down.
I hope this helps.
This is the second time I am reading this expression you have coined, "wielding a religious cudgel."There are many who mistakenly think Jesus had a problem with Jewish traditions, because He condemns the use of some traditions as a means of wielding a religious cudgel.
Anyone should see that "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor, this the entire Torah, everything else is commentary," IS commentary, and is not even close to "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". Unless you think what Yeshua was teaching is "just leave each other alone and you will do fine". Not being hateful=Love your neighbor only in the mind that is still eating heartily from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. No Tree of Life here.That is to say, I simply don't believe it's right to say that Jesus has a problem with the body of tradition which was widely accepted among the rabbis. Jesus actively engages the rabbinic world, and echoes rabbis and sages who came before, such as Hillel the Elder. When the Lord taught, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, this is the whole of the Law and the Prophets" He is echoing Hillel the Elder who said, "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor, this the entire Torah, everything else is commentary,"
Hanukkah? "actively attending synagogue"? According to the Gospel's, more like making cameo appearances. He got dragged from the synagogue in Nazareth to the edge of town to be thrown from a precipice. That was active. [Luke 4:29]Further, Jesus was actively attending synagogue. He observed Hannukah, etc.
Keep reading Matthew 23. Wholesale? More like Fire Sale.As such those who want to argue that Jesus was wholesale anti-rabbinic tradition are simply mistaken.
Previously you said:"That's not possible. There was no Talmud for anyone to put over the Torah."So these were my two points: Properly understanding what the Talmud actually is, and also that attacking the entire body of Jewish tradition (such as that which was written down and compended in the Babylonian Talmud) is not an accurate representation of Jesus as depicted in the Gospels.
Okay, to be fair, we should point out all the good things He said about them...Jesus doesn't wholesale attack rabbinic tradition, Jesus rebukes religious hypocrisy and religious abuse, not religious tradition. Jesus doesn't rebuke the Pharisees for observing the traditions of rabbis, Jesus rebukes those Pharisees who used their status for vanity, acted hypocritically, and used religion as a tool to hurt the vulnerable.
So that is what this is really about? I'll stay out of that name calling circle dance for now. I thought the OP was No Gentiles in Christ. Is that Juda-sizing? Since you ignored my other post, I repeat.Since the Judaizers
At first glance, this text does suggest the Law is still in effect. But there are compelling reasons to believe otherwise. The prime reason is the overall context of chapter 7 together with the first part of chapter 8. The progression is this:Ro 7:25 I thank God, through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Consequently, then, I myself, with the mind, indeed, am slaving for God's law, yet with the flesh for Sin's law.
At first glance, this text does suggest the Law is still in effect.
A commentary on this point. In '95 my job moved me to Orange County CA about 19 miles from Disney land. While getting cable installed my wife said to the the installer, "You have a good voice you should use it for the glory of God." He said "I do I'm the cantor at my synagogue." His synagogue was messianic Jewish. He still observed many of the OT feasts etc. not as a requirement of the law but a celebration of his Jewish heritage.I will remind reader that this statement:
Yet it is easier for heaven and earth to pass by than for one serif of the law to fall
...from Jesus may not have been intended to be taken literally. There is both Biblical and extra-Biblical evidence that such "end-of-the-world" language is often used metaphorically to refer to significant events in the here and now.
In short, there is every reason to believe that Jesus is not saying that the Law will remain in force until heaven and earth pass away. More on this shortly.
At first glance, this text does suggest the Law is still in effect. But there are compelling reasons to believe otherwise. The prime reason is the overall context of chapter 7 together with the first part of chapter 8. The progression is this:
- In Romans 7, Paul describes how while he delights in the Law of God, he also struggles with sin (as per 7:25, quoted above);
- At the end of 7 and on into 8, Paul makes it patently clear that he, having accepted Jesus, has escaped from that state. Dear reader, I invite you to take 2 minutes and read the last half of 7 and on into 8.
the one who rejects Christ and still struggles with sin under the law.
There is evidence in Romans 9 that Paul this may be what Paul is doing.
Paul on the Law: Romans Chapter 9
.....
Continued from: Romans Chapter 8.....
Paul demonstrates that just as Abraham didn't recieve YHWH's favor through bloodline; but through faith; so it is today, for all who are called to hear and, in faith, submit to his commands.
What is righteousness?
Definition of righteous
1 : acting in accord with divine or moral law
Definition of RIGHTEOUS
The Law of Faith
God's Law (Torah)
The Spirit's Law of Life
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?