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.
So you don't think there is any "more" for Believers and the Jews?
Mar 12:28-34 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? (29) And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: (30) And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. (31) And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. (32) And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: (33) And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. (34) And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.
I don't read Hebrew so maybe someone who does could help, but why would it be written "instruction (Law/Torah) will come forth from Zion" and "for Torah shall proceed from me" if everything has already been given?
So you don't think there is any "more" for Believers and the Jews?
YeshuaslaveJeff, I agree that neither Torah nor Yeshua have changed, but I'm curious as to what you think Yeshua meant here:TORAH was given, and continued to be repeatedly given (the same TORAH) to all the people who were called by Yahweh, Ekklesia set apart by Him out of or out from the world, called and chosen by Yahweh for Himself.
"for Torah shall proceed from me" is as always the truth, TORAH proceeding as always, TORAH without change, not even one jot or tittle even to the end of all things.
JESUS is offered/ taught/ 'given' / preached via the GOOD NEWS, GOSPEL OF JESUS,
today,
wherever He is being preached/ shared/ taught/ delivered to men
THE SAME AS ALWAYS - JESUS did not change - JESUS is proceeding to all people wherever they may be on earth alive and able to hear Him, to learn from Him, His Way, His Truth, as the Father is Pleased to Reveal from His Word and to Accomplish in His Grace.
Neither TORAH nor JESUS has changed, and both are as written 'proceeding' by and in and through and for YAHWEH'S WILL and Yahweh's Purpose and Yahweh's Plan, Perfectly.
It's a different separate priesthood, one for the nations. It doesn't abrogate the Levitical priesthood for Israel. The Torah is not abrogated. Not one brushstroke.The oath was already made and Torah changed before Yeshua uttered those words.
This is an example of Yeshua employing his Oral Torah.YeshuaslaveJeff, I agree that neither Torah nor Yeshua have changed, but I'm curious as to what you think Yeshua meant here:
Matthew 5: 38“You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’ 39“But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
Was he changing the commandment or not?
YeshuaslaveJeff, I agree that neither Torah nor Yeshua have changed, but I'm curious as to what you think Yeshua meant here:
Matthew 5: 38“You have heard that it was said, ‘AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.’ 39“But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
Was he changing the commandment or not?
Who are you quoting?Good question Rachel Rachel (did you already know this ? ) >>
"Seeming Contradictions Between the Mosaic Law and the Sermon on the Mount
There are a few cases where Christ interprets the Law of Moses in such a way as to create seeming difficulties. We read for example in Matt. 5:21-22, “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, ‘Thou shalt not kill; and whosever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:’ But I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment:….whosoever shall say, ‘Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire” (Gr. “gehenna”).
Note the contrast between what was written in the Mosaic Law and what Christ preached. This is not an error; it is a very legitimate contrast. It is an excellent example of Christ setting a higher standard for the believer than the standard set by the Mosaic Law. Because Christ is God He, of course, has every right to do just that.
Consider also Ex. 21:23-25 where we see that the law required “life for a life, eye for an eye”. But we read in Matt.5:38 where Jesus said, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek turn to him the other also”. Here too there is a contrast in the words, “But I say”. Again, this is not an error; it is Christ’s right as God to set a higher standard for believers to live under than the standard set by the Mosaic Law.
And let us also consider Numbers 30:2 where we read “If a man vow a vow unto the Lord or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word……”. And in Matt. 5:33-34 we read, “Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old times, ‘Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths’. But I say unto you, ‘Swear not at all…..but let your communication be, ‘Yea, yea’…….’”.
Christ, as the Author of the Law, had every right to demand a higher standard, and that is what He did as demonstrated in these verses quoted above."
Hello my fellow Torah keeper.There are a few cases where Christ interprets the Law of Moses in such a way as to create seeming difficulties. We read for example in Matt. 5:21-22, “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, ‘Thou shalt not kill; and whosever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:’ But I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment:….whosoever shall say, ‘Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire” (Gr. “gehenna”).
You seem to be contradicting yourself a bit.Good question Rachel Rachel (did you already know this ? ) >>
"Seeming Contradictions Between the Mosaic Law and the Sermon on the Mount
There are a few cases where Christ interprets the Law of Moses in such a way as to create seeming difficulties. We read for example in Matt. 5:21-22, “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, ‘Thou shalt not kill; and whosever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:’ But I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment:….whosoever shall say, ‘Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire” (Gr. “gehenna”).
Note the contrast between what was written in the Mosaic Law and what Christ preached. This is not an error; it is a very legitimate contrast. It is an excellent example of Christ setting a higher standard for the believer than the standard set by the Mosaic Law. Because Christ is God He, of course, has every right to do just that.
Consider also Ex. 21:23-25 where we see that the law required “life for a life, eye for an eye”. But we read in Matt.5:38 where Jesus said, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek turn to him the other also”. Here too there is a contrast in the words, “But I say”. Again, this is not an error; it is Christ’s right as God to set a higher standard for believers to live under than the standard set by the Mosaic Law.
And let us also consider Numbers 30:2 where we read “If a man vow a vow unto the Lord or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word……”. And in Matt. 5:33-34 we read, “Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old times, ‘Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths’. But I say unto you, ‘Swear not at all…..but let your communication be, ‘Yea, yea’…….’”.
Christ, as the Author of the Law, had every right to demand a higher standard, and that is what He did as demonstrated in these verses quoted above."
I disagree with you on this. I don't think Yeshua followed Pharasaic tradition.Hello my fellow Torah keeper.
I tend to view these teachings in the Sermon on the Mount as following in the same Rabbinic Tradition of the Pharisees of "building a fence around the Torah."
I've documented this before on this forum. I'm not going to document it again. Let's just agree to disagree.I disagree with you on this. I don't think Yeshua followed Pharasaic tradition.
You haven't documented it for me. Are you referring to the time you said that Yeshua washed his hands because the Pharisees only commented about his disciples? That doesn't take precedence over Yeshua flat out saying that they taught as doctrines the traditions of men.I've documented this before on this forum. I'm not going to document it again. Let's just agree to disagree.
I posted those scriptures from Mark about Yeshua's interaction with a scribe because of what you said to me -GOOD ! WONDERFUL ! TRUTH ! Now go and stick with SCRIPTURE, OUR FATHER'S WORD, and not the word of those opposed to Him..... no matter what the world thinks of them nor how much the world exalts them nor if men think "how great they are" ....
because if they oppose God , they are pernicious (death dealing) and are of no value to learn from.
Doesn't this contradict what you said in post#48Good question Rachel Rachel (did you already know this ? ) >>
"Seeming Contradictions Between the Mosaic Law and the Sermon on the Mount
There are a few cases where Christ interprets the Law of Moses in such a way as to create seeming difficulties. We read for example in Matt. 5:21-22, “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, ‘Thou shalt not kill; and whosever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:’ But I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment:….whosoever shall say, ‘Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire” (Gr. “gehenna”).
Note the contrast between what was written in the Mosaic Law and what Christ preached. This is not an error; it is a very legitimate contrast. It is an excellent example of Christ setting a higher standard for the believer than the standard set by the Mosaic Law. Because Christ is God He, of course, has every right to do just that.
Consider also Ex. 21:23-25 where we see that the law required “life for a life, eye for an eye”. But we read in Matt.5:38 where Jesus said, “Ye have heard that it hath been said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek turn to him the other also”. Here too there is a contrast in the words, “But I say”. Again, this is not an error; it is Christ’s right as God to set a higher standard for believers to live under than the standard set by the Mosaic Law.
And let us also consider Numbers 30:2 where we read “If a man vow a vow unto the Lord or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word……”. And in Matt. 5:33-34 we read, “Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old times, ‘Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths’. But I say unto you, ‘Swear not at all…..but let your communication be, ‘Yea, yea’…….’”.
Christ, as the Author of the Law, had every right to demand a higher standard, and that is what He did as demonstrated in these verses quoted above."
To me that means they weren't (aren't) all wrong and "of no value to learn from" as you say.
You quoted post 48, so no, no contradiction..... what other post did you mean ?Doesn't this contradict what you said in post#48
You seem to be contradicting yourself a bit.
oops -#43 sorry.You quoted post 48, so no, no contradiction..... what other post did you mean ?
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?