Is it possible to keep the law?

[7steps]

please help little ole froggy, i need closure.
Why did peter call it a yoke, and james did not want to burden the gentiles, with the yoke?

Why?

I answered this but you did not like the answer so here in another way. The religious rules and regulations that where practiced during that day where considered the Torah. If it was the religious practices of the day the ones that we had to follow which was what people considered the law then Yahshua would have not followed them either. Now I do admit that it should have been made clearer but like many things in the NT they where trying to figure out what the Torah ruling was post Yahshua. And I don't believe that all of their conclusions where correct. I am so not perfect. But it bothers me not. Because my salvation comes from YHWH as everyones salvation does whether it was being shown metaphorically through sacrifices or accepted from Yahshua the ultimate perfect sacrifice ( and the only true sacrifice that would save). I rather read the Torah, prophets and psalms and the four eyewitnesses and ask Yahweh for His guidance on what I should and should not do. I would have been considered a gentile before I was saved, now just part of Gods people. And as a previous gentile I don't find the observance of the law to be a burden. I think that anybody that does. Does not know what the Torah is, what it represents, what it means to observe the Torah, who is helping us observe the Torah, the more I study and observe the Torah the more I understand God's beautiful plan. I have never told you to observe the Torah as you seem to imply in other post. But you seem to think that because I observe the Torah I am not saved. Because I am tying myself to a yoke. To an unnecessary burden. And that if I do it is do it all perfectly or die without salvation. Which is not true. This is the exact mentality that keeps people from seeing how beautifully God put things together. If the Torah was such a yoke and a burden why does the Psalmist say:


The law of the LORD is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the testimony of the LORD is sure,
making wise the simple;
8 the precepts of the LORD are right,
rejoicing the heart;
the commandment of the LORD is pure,
enlightening the eyes;
9 the fear of the LORD is clean,
enduring forever;
the rules of the LORD are true,
and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold,
even much fine gold;
sweeter also than honey
and drippings of the honeycomb.
11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.

12 Who can discern his errors?
Declare me innocent from hidden faults.
13 Keep back your servant also from presumptuous sins;
let them not have dominion over me!
Then I shall be blameless,
and innocent of great transgression.

14 Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
be acceptable in your sight,
O LORD, my rock and my redeemer.


The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Ps 19:7–14). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

I think that the defense that the Torah is a yoke is so that we could make the church bigger to include people that did not feel like changing their ways to YHWH's way. People that want to praise God in whichever way they want. Now does that affect someones salvation. I don't know, that is between YHWH and the person, he knows their heart and if they are one of His people. That is my final answer Regis.

 

[from scratch]

I answered this but you did not like the answer so here in another way. The funny thing is i am what would have been considered a gentile, now just part of Gods people. And I don't find the observance of the law to be a burden. I think that anybody that does. Does not know what the Torah is, what it represents, what it means to observe the Torah, who is helping us observe the Torah, the more I study and observe the Torah the more I understand God's beautiful plan. I have never told you to observe the Torah as you seem to imply in other post. But you seem to think that because I observe the Torah I am not saved. Because I am tying myself to a yoke. To an unnecessary burden. And that if I do it is do it all perfectly or die without salvation. Which is not true. This is the exact mentality that keeps people from seeing how beautifully God put things together. If the Torah was such a yoke and a burden why does the Psalmist say:


The law of the LORD is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the testimony of the LORD is sure,
making wise the simple;
8 the precepts of the LORD are right,
rejoicing the heart;
the commandment of the LORD is pure,
enlightening the eyes;
9 the fear of the LORD is clean,
enduring forever;
the rules of the LORD are true,
and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold,
even much fine gold;
sweeter also than honey
and drippings of the honeycomb.
11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.

12 Who can discern his errors?
Declare me innocent from hidden faults.
13 Keep back your servant also from presumptuous sins;
let them not have dominion over me!
Then I shall be blameless,
and innocent of great transgression.

14 Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
be acceptable in your sight,
O LORD, my rock and my redeemer.


The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Ps 19:7–14). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

I am so not perfect. But it bothers me not. Because my salvation comes from YHWH as everyones salvation does whether it was being shown metaphorically through sacrifices or accepted from Yahshua the ultimate perfect sacrifice ( and the only true sacrifice that would save).I think that the defense that the Torah is a yoke is so that we could make the church bigger to include people that did not feel like changing their ways to YHWH's way. People that want to praise God in whichever way they want. Now does that affect someones salvation. I don't know, that is between YHWH and the person, he knows their heart and if they are one of His people. That is my final answer Regis.

So you have me so confused about what you are promoting. I sure understand that you love the law and don't consider it a burden. I don't understand why it is such a joy to you when we have a better covenant. Considering that you are spouting off about the law so much I really wonder how you pass or ignore such things as Gal 4:30 which says to throw out the law and that garace and law don't mix, period. Or how about Gal 5:3, 4 which clearsly states that you can have one or the other? Would you mind helping us out with an explaination of those references,pretty please?

 

[tall73]

I think that the defense that the Torah is a yoke is so that we could make the church bigger to include people that did not feel like changing their ways to YHWH's way. People that want to praise God in whichever way they want. Now does that affect someones salvation. I don't know, that is between YHWH and the person, he knows their heart and if they are one of His people. That is my final answer Regis.

Did you ever address the actual text about the yoke in your answer?

 

[7steps]

so you have meso confused about what you are promoting. I sure understand that you love the law and don't consider it a burden. I don't understand why it is such a joy to you when we have a better covenant. Considering that you are spouting off about the law so much I really wonder how you pass or ignore such things as Gal 4:30 which says to throw out the law and that garace and law don't mix, period. Or how about Gal 5:3, 4 which clearsly states that you can have one or the other? Would you mind helping us out with an explaination of those references,pretty please?

Again my salvation is in Yahshua and I feel comfortable being able to not agree with parts of what people consider scripture in the NT if The torah, phrophets and psalms conflicts with it. Galatians is a perfect example. How anyone can read Galatians 3:10 and compare it to Deut 27 where he supposedly quoted from and come up with his conclusion is beyond me. And the horrendous try to use the story of Hagar and Sarah as a metaphor for his position. WOW. As far as salvation is concerned we are all saved by the same thing YHWH salvation trough Yahshua. Very beautifully presented in the Torah, Prophets and psalms as well as the four eyewitnesses.

 

[7steps]

Did you ever address the actual text about the yoke in your answer?

Post 162 he had already ask this but he did not like my answer. It still comes down to reading and doing your own thinking on what it says in the Torah, Prophet and Psalms. I don't consider myself anything special, I am just like every other previous gentile in need of salvation. Coming with my own baggage in the presence of YHWH. And I as a previous gentile never have seen anything in the Torah that I would consider a burden, because I have had the benefit as any person post Yahshua to have 20/20 hind site. We can be more grown up now than the Jews where because they practiced the Torah mostly without knowing what they where doing it for. We can now see it from post Yahshua standpoint. To be able to look at the Torah with Yahshua in mind. I understand that YHWH's plan has always been to provide salvation because nobody was saved by doing the law. Not only was it to show us our shortcommings. And to show us that their is spiritual laws that need to be followed. The law was there as a metaphor he wanted the Jews to be the actors that showed his metaphor to the world so they needed to practice it perfectly it was a dress rehearsal to show God's plan. Now post Yashua some of those metaphors have been completed but not all of them. And just because we have Yahshua the spiritual laws have not been done away with they will be there until the end of time. So just because we have salvation does it mean that we ignore the laws. In my humble opinion and for what I have gathered from my studies, no. And nothing that has been said here has changed my view. I think mainly because the arguments presented where from where I started.

 

[from scratch]

Again my salvation is in Yahshua and I feel comfortable being able to not agree with parts of what people consider scripture in the NT if The torah, phrophets and psalms conflicts with it. Galatians is a perfect example. How anyone can read Galatians 3:10 and compare it to Deut 27 where he supposedly quoted from and come up with his conclusion is beyond me. And the horrendous try to use the story of Hagar and Sarah as a metaphor for his position. WOW. As far as salvation is concerned we are all saved by the same thing YHWH salvation trough Yahshua. Very beautifully presented in the Torah, Prophets and psalms as well as the four eyewitnesses.

Where is salvation/redemption presented in the Torah?

 

[Frogster]

I answered this but you did not like the answer so here in another way. The religious rules and regulations that where practiced during that day where considered the Torah. If it was the religious practices of the day the ones that we had to follow which was what people considered the law then Yahshua would have not followed them either. Now I do admit that it should have been made clearer but like many things in the NT they where trying to figure out what the Torah ruling was post Yahshua. And I don't believe that all of their conclusions where correct. I am so not perfect. But it bothers me not. Because my salvation comes from YHWH as everyones salvation does whether it was being shown metaphorically through sacrifices or accepted from Yahshua the ultimate perfect sacrifice ( and the only true sacrifice that would save). I rather read the Torah, prophets and psalms and the four eyewitnesses and ask Yahweh for His guidance on what I should and should not do. I would have been considered a gentile before I was saved, now just part of Gods people. And as a previous gentile I don't find the observance of the law to be a burden. I think that anybody that does. Does not know what the Torah is, what it represents, what it means to observe the Torah, who is helping us observe the Torah, the more I study and observe the Torah the more I understand God's beautiful plan. I have never told you to observe the Torah as you seem to imply in other post. But you seem to think that because I observe the Torah I am not saved. Because I am tying myself to a yoke. To an unnecessary burden. And that if I do it is do it all perfectly or die without salvation. Which is not true. This is the exact mentality that keeps people from seeing how beautifully God put things together. If the Torah was such a yoke and a burden why does the Psalmist say:


The law of the LORD is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the testimony of the LORD is sure,
making wise the simple;
8 the precepts of the LORD are right,
rejoicing the heart;
the commandment of the LORD is pure,
enlightening the eyes;
9 the fear of the LORD is clean,
enduring forever;
the rules of the LORD are true,
and righteous altogether.
10 More to be desired are they than gold,
even much fine gold;
sweeter also than honey
and drippings of the honeycomb.
11 Moreover, by them is your servant warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.

12 Who can discern his errors?
Declare me innocent from hidden faults.
13 Keep back your servant also from presumptuous sins;
let them not have dominion over me!
Then I shall be blameless,
and innocent of great transgression.

14 Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
be acceptable in your sight,
O LORD, my rock and my redeemer.


The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Ps 19:7–14). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

I think that the defense that the Torah is a yoke is so that we could make the church bigger to include people that did not feel like changing their ways to YHWH's way. People that want to praise God in whichever way they want. Now does that affect someones salvation. I don't know, that is between YHWH and the person, he knows their heart and if they are one of His people. That is my final answer Regis.

You still have not addressed the simple fact. Why did Peter agree with Paul, that the law was a yoke, and James did not want to burden the Gentiles with this wonderful law life, you seem to promote.

Also, they were under the old glory, hence their love of the law was from that historical position, but it was not until David saw the blessedness, of righteousness imputed, that he could see the better glory. Read Romans 4.

Scripture calls law life for children, the promise did not come by law.

 

[from scratch]

Again my salvation is in Yahshua and I feel comfortable being able to not agree with parts of what people consider scripture in the NT if The torah, phrophets and psalms conflicts with it. Galatians is a perfect example. How anyone can read Galatians 3:10 and compare it to Deut 27 where he supposedly quoted from and come up with his conclusion is beyond me. And the horrendous try to use the story of Hagar and Sarah as a metaphor for his position. WOW. As far as salvation is concerned we are all saved by the same thing YHWH salvation trough Yahshua. Very beautifully presented in the Torah, Prophets and psalms as well as the four eyewitnesses.

You wouldn't care to name his conclusion would you? The Gospels of Mark and Luke are not eye witnesses. Both were companions of Paul. And Luke is not even a Jew.

 

[Frogster]

Did you ever address the actual text about the yoke in your answer?

 

[7steps]

You wouldn't care to name his conclusion would you? The Gospels of Mark and Luke are not eye witnesses. Both were companions of Paul. And Luke is not even a Jew.

Oh wow thank you I did not know that about the eye witnesses. Wow you did not understand the conclusion he made. That is weired you use it all the time. The point is that the scripture he quotes clearly states the opposite. SO the author of Galatians is totally wrong. But because it is considered scripture it can not be wrong so our interpretation must be wrong. So lets fit the pieces and say since he was post Yahshua heis conclusion supersedes that of the Torah. Even if he is misquoting it.

 

[7steps]

Where is salvation/redemption presented in the Torah?

Your question like always comes from a point of trying to prove that I am wrong. Not because you want to know. Read the Torah and really think about what it is that you are reading. Everything in the Torah was a metaphor for Yashua's redemption.

This is from the first "law" presented in Leviticus by someone that is willing to look at the Torah as a gift not a curse, burden or yoke.


"Burnt offerings predict the Messiah.
‘When any one of you brings an offering to Yahweh, you shall bring your offering of the livestock—of the herd and of the flock. If his offering is a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it of his own free will at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before Yahweh. (Leviticus 1:2-3) The olah, or “burnt offering,” was completely voluntary, an act denoting homage to Yahweh or celebrating His atonement of the worshipper’s sins. Although it was offered of one’s own free will, there were restrictions concerning how it was to be done. The reason, as we shall see, was that Yahshua’s death on Calvary was to be an olah—a voluntary sacrifice that the Messiah would make of Himself, honoring Yahweh, providing atonement and celebrating the freedom it would bring to mankind. First, it had to be a clean animal (as defined by the Mosaic dietary laws). One couldn’t offer up a snake or pig, an act of penance, a sum of money, or even one’s firstborn child. Because it was a picture of the Messiah’s self-sacrifice, this had to involve the spilling of blood: an innocent life had to be given up—its innocence represented by restricting the types of animals that could be used to those that were “clean” for dietary purposes. Yahshua would later bring this metaphor home to roost, declaring that we had to “eat His flesh” and “drink His blood”—that is, assimilate Him into our very lives—in order to be saved.
Second, the olah had to be performed at a specific place: at the tabernacle of meeting. “Then he [that is, the one who brings the offering] shall put his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him. He shall kill the bull before Yahweh; and the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall bring the blood and sprinkle the blood all around on the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of meeting.” (Leviticus 1:4-5) Although the tabernacle was portable by design, its function was eventually “set in stone” with the building of the temple, on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem. The geography of the crucifixion provides remarkable confirmation of the Torah’s prophetic accuracy. The blood had to be sprinkled “all around the altar.” It would transpire that Yahshua was scourged within an inch of His life in the Tower of Antonia—only a few hundred feet from where the altar stood in the temple. Bulls or oxen were to be sacrificed on the west side of the altar (that is, between the altar and the door of the tabernacle, which faced east—v.3), and sheep on the north side (v.11). And sure enough, the crucifixion site was northwest of the temple mount, at a spot now known as “Gordon’s Calvary,” a rock escarpment tucked in behind Jerusalem’s present day main bus station, a mere seven hundred paces from the temple (not down south at the religion-encrusted Church of the Holy Sepulcher). Here you can still see the “skull’s face” alluded to in John 19:17.
Third, just as the worshipper transferred his guilt to the sacrificial animal by placing his hand upon its head, our atonement is achieved through the transference of our sin to Yahshua. Note that the priest doesn’t slay the olah—that is done by the one who has brought the offering. Each of us is personally responsible for the death of God’s Messiah. Note also that this slaying is done “before Yahweh.” Nothing is hidden from Him."
Ken Powers.

Your antagonism towards the Torah built by the Ignatius, Marcionic and Tertulian thought of the NT is what keeps most from seeing the Torah for what it is. A picture of God's redemption.Sorry that you do not see that but your questions after questions in the assumption that I am ignoring or that you have cornered me in my reasoning is funny.

 

[7steps]

so you have meso confused about what you are promoting. I sure understand that you love the law and don't consider it a burden. I don't understand why it is such a joy to you when we have a better covenant. Considering that you are spouting off about the law so much I really wonder how you pass or ignore such things as Gal 4:30 which says to throw out the law and that garace and law don't mix, period. Or how about Gal 5:3, 4 which clearsly states that you can have one or the other? Would you mind helping us out with an explaination of those references,pretty please?

Where does your salvation come from?

Because my salvation comes from YHWH as everyones salvation does whether it was being shown metaphorically through sacrifices or accepted from Yahshua the ultimate perfect sacrifice ( and the only true sacrifice that would save). You can not have Yahshua without the Torah. His death would have been meaningless because nobody would have understood it.

 

[7steps]

You still have not addressed the simple fact. Why did Peter agree with Paul, that the law was a yoke, and James did not want to burden the Gentiles with this wonderful law life, you seem to promote.

Also, they were under the old glory, hence their love of the law was from that historical position, but it was not until David saw the blessedness, of righteousness imputed, that he could see the better glory. Read Romans 4.

Scripture calls law life for children, the promise did not come by law.

Post 425, but i seems like you forgot that you did not like my answer.

 

[from scratch]

Your question like always comes from a point of trying to prove that I am wrong. Not because you want to know. Read the Torah and really think about what it is that you are reading. Everything in the Torah was a metaphor for Yashua's redemption.

This is from the first "law" presented in Leviticus by someone that is willing to look at the Torah as a gift not a curse, burden or yoke.


"Burnt offerings predict the Messiah.
‘When any one of you brings an offering to Yahweh, you shall bring your offering of the livestock—of the herd and of the flock. If his offering is a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish; he shall offer it of his own free will at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before Yahweh. (Leviticus 1:2-3) The olah, or “burnt offering,” was completely voluntary, an act denoting homage to Yahweh or celebrating His atonement of the worshipper’s sins. Although it was offered of one’s own free will, there were restrictions concerning how it was to be done. The reason, as we shall see, was that Yahshua’s death on Calvary was to be an olah—a voluntary sacrifice that the Messiah would make of Himself, honoring Yahweh, providing atonement and celebrating the freedom it would bring to mankind. First, it had to be a clean animal (as defined by the Mosaic dietary laws). One couldn’t offer up a snake or pig, an act of penance, a sum of money, or even one’s firstborn child. Because it was a picture of the Messiah’s self-sacrifice, this had to involve the spilling of blood: an innocent life had to be given up—its innocence represented by restricting the types of animals that could be used to those that were “clean” for dietary purposes. Yahshua would later bring this metaphor home to roost, declaring that we had to “eat His flesh” and “drink His blood”—that is, assimilate Him into our very lives—in order to be saved.
Second, the olah had to be performed at a specific place: at the tabernacle of meeting. “Then he [that is, the one who brings the offering] shall put his hand on the head of the burnt offering, and it will be accepted on his behalf to make atonement for him. He shall kill the bull before Yahweh; and the priests, Aaron’s sons, shall bring the blood and sprinkle the blood all around on the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of meeting.” (Leviticus 1:4-5) Although the tabernacle was portable by design, its function was eventually “set in stone” with the building of the temple, on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem. The geography of the crucifixion provides remarkable confirmation of the Torah’s prophetic accuracy. The blood had to be sprinkled “all around the altar.” It would transpire that Yahshua was scourged within an inch of His life in the Tower of Antonia—only a few hundred feet from where the altar stood in the temple. Bulls or oxen were to be sacrificed on the west side of the altar (that is, between the altar and the door of the tabernacle, which faced east—v.3), and sheep on the north side (v.11). And sure enough, the crucifixion site was northwest of the temple mount, at a spot now known as “Gordon’s Calvary,” a rock escarpment tucked in behind Jerusalem’s present day main bus station, a mere seven hundred paces from the temple (not down south at the religion-encrusted Church of the Holy Sepulcher). Here you can still see the “skull’s face” alluded to in John 19:17.
Third, just as the worshipper transferred his guilt to the sacrificial animal by placing his hand upon its head, our atonement is achieved through the transference of our sin to Yahshua. Note that the priest doesn’t slay the olah—that is done by the one who has brought the offering. Each of us is personally responsible for the death of God’s Messiah. Note also that this slaying is done “before Yahweh.” Nothing is hidden from Him."
Ken Powers.

Your antagonism towards the Torah built by the Ignatius, Marcionic and Tertulian thought of the NT is what keeps most from seeing the Torah for what it is. A picture of God's redemption.Sorry that you do not see that but your questions after questions in the assumption that I am ignoring or that you have cornered me in my reasoning is funny.

I am sorry that you feel I am antoganistic towards the law. I feel that you are attacking and being antoganistic towards grace and the Bible says you can't have both. Of course you reject this so you can promote your idea. You hve clearly stated that you reject Christianity. What more does one need to see your motive.

It seems like I recall you being told the bit dog barks.

 

[from scratch]

Where does your salvation come from?

Because my salvation comes from YHWH as everyones salvation does whether it was being shown metaphorically through sacrifices or accepted from Yahshua the ultimate perfect sacrifice ( and the only true sacrifice that would save). You can not have Yahshua without the Torah. His death would have been meaningless because nobody would have understood it.

My salvation comes from being purchased from the market/redemption by the blood of Jesus, God Himself.

Christ id the end of the law for righteousness. Rom 10:4

 

[7steps]

I am sorry that you feel I am antoganistic towards the law. I feel that you are attacking and being antoganistic towards grace and the Bible says you can't have both. Of course you reject this so you can promote your idea. You hve clearly stated that you reject Christianity. What more does one need to see your motive.

It seems like I recall you being told the bit dog barks.

When did I clearly state that I reject Christianity? You do understand that you don't have to believe in Paul and his writings or any apostles writings in the NT to be a Christian that you have to believe that you where saved by YHWH trough the ultimate sacrifice of Yahshua the Messiah (Christ). Christian a believer in Christ salvation not in the doctrines of men. I might have clearly stated that I reject what you and some others here define as Christianity. But I am still very much saved by Yahshua's sacrifice.

 

[tall73]

Post 162 he had already ask this but he did not like my answer.

To them the law they where trying to carry was enslaving, it was religious law it was Yahshua's contention with the religious leaders of the time. They where not practicing the Torah they where practicing their religious interpretation of the Torah. To me observance of the Torah is not a burden or a yoke because whether I do everything or understand everything is irrelevant to my salvation because I have someone stronger than me carrying that yoke with me. I trust and relly in Yahweh's salvation and his instructions including the Torah.

The issue the council took up was

a. circumcision
b. keeping the law of Moses.

Circumcision was particularly being advocated.

Act 15:1 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved."


Act 15:5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses."


So I have some point blank questions for you because I cannot get where you are coming from. I tend to think at least your view has some benefits of being internally consistent. But I can't test your view unless you clarify.


A. Do you accept the book of Acts as Scripture. If you fail to answer this you have failed in every respect to address the question asked you about the yoke, no matter what else you say. You have already posited that you do not accept all the protestant cannon. Fine. But what is your position on Acts?

B. Was/is circumcision necessary for gentiles?

C. Would grown men being circumcised be a burden?

D. The pharisees of the time viewed the written law of Moses and the further "oral torah" to be the law of Moses. I think I can grant you that for the sake of discussion. And the people agitating here were stated to be pharisee converts. So they may well have meant both.


But would you not agree that if they were pushing both then the council would be considering the question of BOTH the verbal and the written law of Moses at the least?

And yet they still do not burden the gentiles with this. And they do not insist on circumcision.

Peter argues that God poured out His Spirit on the gentiles whether they were circumcised or not. Since God chose to do it, how could they argue with Him?

Act 15:7 And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, "Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.
Act 15:8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us,
Act 15:9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith.


God made a choice. They accepted it.


This was not Peter's first contention on the point:

Act 11:1 Now the apostles and the brothers who were throughout Judea heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God.
Act 11:2 So when Peter went up to Jerusalem, the circumcision party criticized him, saying,
Act 11:3 "You went to uncircumcised men and ate with them."
Act 11:4 But Peter began and explained it to them in order:

Act 11:12 And the Spirit told me to go with them, making no distinction. These six brothers also accompanied me, and we entered the man's house.

Act 11:15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning.
Act 11:16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.'
Act 11:17 If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?"
Act 11:18 When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, "Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.

And even if they where practicing the Torah as you want to state it does not matter if it was a burden we have someone that we are yoked to, helping us carry it.

I think based on Acts 15 and Acts 21 that the Jersualem believers, and indeed the Jewish believers in the diaspora went right on keeping the law.

I don't think they thought it was a burden. And I think they thought it was their heritage and pointed to Christ. It was their expression of their messianic hopes fulfilled. I also think it was essential to their outreach to other Jews.

But they in no way state that the gentiles should do this, and that the gentiles should take on the burden with "help."

I think Paul's comments in Galatians were to those who would say that you have to be circumcised to be saved. That is why he makes it a one or the other proposition. For James and Peter and the Jews who were zealous for the law, there was no danger of this being legalism.

This was clearly expressed at the council:

Act 15:11 But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will."

The Jewish believers were not keeping the law for salvation. It was who they were and it was what pointed to their fulfilled hopes even more clearly now.

They had the right attitude toward it. And the discussion in Acts 15 was not whether the Jewish believers would STOP keeping the law. The discussion was what to do about these new gentiles who God chose.

The decision was made for them according to Peter. God chose to include them without them becoming circumcised.

And he says why put a yoke on them that God did not require of them? Why have them keep this when it is not their heritage, it would not help their evangelism, it was simply not required by God.

Act 15:10 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?

If God had demanded circumcision He would have done it before pouring out His Spirit on them without it.

Why then should the pharisee contingent demand it now?

The council by the way does not say that Gentiles can't keep more of the law if they want. It says they cannot be required to because God did not require it.

It is a yoke and a burden when folks say they have to keep it to be saved.

In Galatians this was the issue. Some were buying into it and losing sight of grace. They were trying to be saved by human effort. So those people had to make a choice. They couldn't have grace AND human effort.


If you derive benefit from the law that is fine. I don't think anything in the New Testament says you cannot practice it if it brings you closer to Christ.

But it does say it is not required. It is not a yoke to be put on you by others. It was God's choice to pour out His Spirit on gentiles.

... man must bear one thing or another: love for Yahweh or the curse of sin. That’s why Yahshua invited us to “Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” (Matthew 11:29-30) The “heavy burden” we put down when we become “yoked” with Yahshua is sin itself. If you yoke an impala with an ox, you know who’s going to be doing all the work.
(a great observation from Ken Powers)

Grabbing on to this text because it uses the word yoke is not dealing with the other text.

In Acts the yoke is a burden. It is TESTING God to place a burden He did not. The gentiles are being asked to do a work they were not told to do.

In Matthew the yoke is a relief. We already have a burden that Christ takes on Himself.

You need to deal with what each text says.

 

[tall73]

Funny thing it still does not make you right that it was a burden and perhaps that is where your disregard for the word of God the Torah comes from and your lack of desire to understand the beauty of it.

It was a burden.

Act 15:10 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?


Peter is saying that they were putting God's earlier choice to the test. God's earlier choice was to give the Spirit without circumcision.

Now the pharisee contingent are saying you have to be circumcised to be saved.

They are adding to what God required. That is a burden.

 

[tall73]

Where is salvation/redemption presented in the Torah?

Jesus seems to have thought it was:

Luk 24:24 Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but him they did not see."
Luk 24:25 And he said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken!
Luk 24:26 Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?"
Luk 24:27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

 

[tall73]

Your antagonism towards the Torah built by the Ignatius, Marcionic and Tertulian thought of the NT is what keeps most from seeing the Torah for what it is.

I would cite the epistle of Barnabas and The Disciple to Diognetus as some of the earlier witnesses quite hostile to the Torah.

They seem to not even concede that the Torah was God's revelation at the time.

I don't get that entirely from Ignatius. Plus you always have to weed through the longer and shorter versions.


But we are not talking about Ignatius or Marcion.

We are talking about James and Peter. James was certainly not opposed to the law. Yet he did not require the gentiles to be circumcised and to keep the law of Moses.

We are asking you to address that, not later authors. It is well enough for you to say that later authors distorted things. But we are asking you to deal with Peter, an apostle of Jesus, and James, the leader of the Jerusalem church which was zealous for the law.

Please do so.