Juster on the dangers in the HR movement.

[rick357]

I disagree with Error #1, I believe in one Law, however, I agree that the following quote from Error #2 is indeed error: "that true Christians are the lost tribes of Israel. In an amazing twist of the Bible it is claimed that true Christians are physical descendants of the lost tribes who were scattered, this being the purported reason they became Christians. It is their answer to the puzzle of what happened to the lost tribes of Israel." It is replacement theology, in my opinion.

Yes it seems that to me also....if this were valid why would the apostle to the gentiles not mention it also why would he tell the Gentiles not to become proselytes of the Jews since they were already Jewish accourding to this idea....but remain observant himself.

 

[daq]

I disagree with Error #1, I believe in one Law, however, I agree that the following quote from Error #2 is indeed error: "that true Christians are the lost tribes of Israel. In an amazing twist of the Bible it is claimed that true Christians are physical descendants of the lost tribes who were scattered, this being the purported reason they became Christians. It is their answer to the puzzle of what happened to the lost tribes of Israel." It is replacement theology, in my opinion.

I just went back to quote from the article, which I had already read in its entirety yesterday when this thread was posted here, and now it seems the article may have been updated because the portion I remember reading and was going to quote, (with a specific accusation contained therein) is now no longer there.

Without the material to quote from here is my simple reply to the idea that Paul was no longer Torah observant after becoming a talmid of Yeshua but that some rogue element supposedly concocted the idea at the beginning of the modern Messianic movement so as to sneak Torah observance into Christianity:

Acts 24:13-14 KJV
13. Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.
14. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

Romans 7:14-25 KJV
14. For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25. I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Paul absolutely remained Torah observant but not in the same exact ways that he formerly observed Torah before meeting Yeshua. In fact he clearly states in the Romans passage above that he served both "the Torah of the mind", which is the Torah of Elohim, and likewise the Torah of sin and death, (the soul which sins shall die) and therefore we are to mortify the deeds of the body and our own "unruly members" of our own "households" which are upon our own "earth"-land and soil of the heart. In other words if I use Torah against myself to cut off sin from my own body, soul, and mind, (rather than using it against my neighbor) then I "use the law lawfully" in the Way it was intended. In such a way Torah then becomes like a rod of iron in my hand, (after the Way of the Testimony of Yeshua the Master-Teacher) and such a one is not "under" the law if he or she wields the power given through Torah against himself/herself so as to cut away and cleave unto the Father.

 

[daq]

Also this statement seems it might have some legitimacy at first:

I have called this error "One Law" - from the verse in Numbers 15:16 often used to justify it. I wrote a paper specifically to address this. Incredibly, these folks try to explain away Acts 15 and Galatians.
Daniel Juster - The Danger of Jewish Roots Movements

That is, until one reads elsewhere on the same ministry site how Acts 15 is employed against the Testimony of Yeshua to annul the words of Messiah concerning Torah and how it applies to anyone who desires to be his talmid-disciple:

[FONT=Times, serif]Acts 15 - The Definitive Moment[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times, serif]Acts 15 gives us a record of what happened at that meeting in Jerusalem. The first verse sets the context for the Council and makes it plain that the question is really about what Gentiles must do in order to be saved (see also verse 5). Peter replies, particularly in verses 9 and 11, that Gentiles have already been saved as Gentiles - not as Jews or Jewish proselytes, but as Gentiles. So James' statement in verses 19-21 is not so much a decision as an explanation of the halakhic position that follows from what God has done. It is interesting to notice that his four points bear a remarkable similarity to the Noachide Laws[/FONT][FONT=Times, serif]4[/FONT][FONT=Times, serif] later to be formalised by Rabbinic Judaism in the 2nd Century, but widely known to be extant in several forms in 2nd Temple days.[/FONT]
Tikkun Staff Writers - Which Law do we Keep?

[FONT=Times, serif]Which Law?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times, serif]But which law are we obligated to? Where are the boundaries of the regulations that affect each of us? Michael Wyschogrod writes: "The distinction that needs to be made, therefore, is not between the law before Christ and after Christ, but the law for Jews and for Gentiles"[/FONT][FONT=Times, serif]5[/FONT][FONT=Times, serif].[/FONT]
[FONT=Times, serif]Essentially, Jews live and are called as Jews, in covenant relationship with God, keeping the Law that has been given to them. Jewish believers are now alive to God in Messiah Yeshua, having true atonement and fulfilment in Him. As written earlier, Rav Sha'ul tells us that the gift and calling of God is irrevocable (Romans 11:19). There is a body of Scripture that assures us that God has not revoked His covenant with the Jewish people; Yeshua Himself famously saying, [/FONT]

[FONT=Times, serif]Do not think that I came to abolish the Law and the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfil. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Torah, until all is accomplished (Matthew 5:17-18).[/FONT]
[FONT=Times, serif]
Gentiles, on the other hand, live and are called as Gentiles, now in covenant relationship with God as Rav Sha'ul makes clear in Ephesians 2:12-13, 19.[/FONT]
Tikkun Staff Writers - Which Law do we Keep?

The above is essentially using Acts 15 and Ephesians 2:12-19 to nullify the statement of Yeshua from Matthew 5:17-18, as it applies to gentiles, as if the words of Messiah from that passage are only supposed to apply to the Jewish people. This seems to be foundational to the argument presented in the OP linked article. In addition the above is essentially teaching two different covenants for two different peoples in opposition to what Paul taught in the Ephesians passage quoted by the author. How can there be one new man, one body of the faithful, with two different covenants depending on racial blood lines? Essentially the "grafting in" process has been annulled and this point is also made clear by the erroneous idea that Peter said the "Gentiles have already been saved as Gentiles" when Peter said no such thing. No one is to consider themselves "already saved" and even Paul speaks out against such thinking.

 

[rick357]

Also this statement seems it might have some legitimacy at first:

That is, until one reads elsewhere on the same ministry site how Acts 15 is employed against the Testimony of Yeshua to annul the words of Messiah concerning Torah and how it applies to anyone who desires to be his talmid-disciple:

The above is essentially using Acts 15 and Ephesians 2:12-19 to nullify the statement of Yeshua from Matthew 5:17-18, as it applies to gentiles, as if the words of Messiah from that passage are only supposed to apply to the Jewish people. This seems to be foundational to the argument presented in the OP linked article. In addition the above is essentially teaching two different covenants for two different peoples in opposition to what Paul taught in the Ephesians passage quoted by the author. How can there be one new man, one body of the faithful, with two different covenants depending on racial blood lines? Essentially the "grafting in" process has been annulled and this point is also made clear by the erroneous idea that Peter said the "Gentiles have already been saved as Gentiles" when Peter said no such thing. No one is to consider themselves "already saved" and even Paul speaks out against such thinking.

Not saying I believe what I am about to write but its worth exploring...as to the law... the Noah law is not in contention with Moses any more than love commands of NT(I know they are quotes from OT)but Paul teaches gentiles they have come into promise of Abraham but never mentions promises of Israel(head of nations...land of Israel...ect) jews would have both promises....and it is correct that Pauls teaching to gentiles and Jerusalem council seem to dove tail to laws of Noah....then there is timothy and titus...timothy is circumsized as his mother was jewish making him qualified without becoming a proselyte ...titus is not compelled to such and Paul has said for gentiles if you are circumsized Christ shall profit you nothing...

 

[daq]

Not saying I believe what I am about to write but its worth exploring...as to the law... the Noah law is not in contention with Moses any more than love commands of NT(I know they are quotes from OT)but Paul teaches gentiles they have come into promise of Abraham but never mentions promises of Israel(head of nations...land of Israel...ect) jews would have both promises....and it is correct that Pauls teaching to gentiles and Jerusalem council seem to dove tail to laws of Noah....then there is timothy and titus...timothy is circumsized as his mother was jewish making him qualified without becoming a proselyte ...titus is not compelled to such and Paul has said for gentiles if you are circumsized Christ shall profit you nothing...

What about the Canaanite woman of Tyre? Does she get to stay a Canaanite? The answer is no because of Zechariah 14:21. Can she be circumcised according to the circumcision which was given to father Abraham? Was she not rather grafted in by faith, (at a later date) according to what Yeshua says to her in Matthew 15:22-28? Circumcision is of the heart and that is even shown also in the Torah of Moshe which was given not just to the tribe of Yhudah but to all the tribes of Yisrael. The Canaanitish woman of Tyre had her heart circumcised because she was finally willing to change her own mindset and become like a puppy sitting beneath the table eating whatever crumbs of truth might fall from the plates of the children of the kingdom, (or the table of the Master-Teacher). Circumcision really is the main stickler but only because most are not willing to distinguish a difference between the physical and the supernal and which kind is being spoken of in which context. For instance when Paul writes, "But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter", most perceive Paul to be speaking of physically circumcised Jews on the one hand and Gentiles on the other but I do not see it that way because circumcision is of the heart. Peter received three commissions from Yeshua after he was resurrected and all three admonishments concern feeding and shepherding sheep and lambkins, (the truly circumcised in heart). Therefore when the beginners training under Paul is complete the talmid is then handed over to Peter, (if indeed one makes it through Paul without twisting everything into oblivion and destroying himself).

 

[rick357]

What about the Canaanite woman of Tyre? Does she get to stay a Canaanite? The answer is no because of Zechariah 14:21. Can she be circumcised according to the circumcision which was given to father Abraham? Was she not rather grafted in by faith, (at a later date) according to what Yeshua says to her in Matthew 15:22-28? Circumcision is of the heart and that is even shown also in the Torah of Moshe which was given not just to the tribe of Yhudah but to all the tribes of Yisrael. The Canaanitish woman of Tyre had her heart circumcised because she was finally willing to change her own mindset and become like a puppy sitting beneath the table eating whatever crumbs of truth might fall from the plates of the children of the kingdom, (or the table of the Master-Teacher). Circumcision really is the main stickler but only because most are not willing to distinguish a difference between the physical and the supernal and which kind is being spoken of in which context. For instance when Paul writes, "But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter", most perceive Paul to be speaking of physically circumcised Jews on the one hand and Gentiles on the other but I do not see it that way because circumcision is of the heart. Peter received three commissions from Yeshua after he was resurrected and all three admonishments concern feeding and shepherding sheep and lambkins, (the truly circumcised in heart). Therefore when the beginners training under Paul is complete the talmid is then handed over to Peter, (if indeed one makes it through Paul without twisting everything into oblivion and destroying himself).

Great post...as to Paul he is that angel every believer must wrestle through the night if the Son is ever to rise in our hearts

 

[daq]

Great post...as to Paul he is that angel every believer must wrestle through the night if the Son is ever to rise in our hearts

Actually, according to Paul, Messiah has been made the minister of the circumcision, (Romans 15:8) and according to Hosea 13, Daniel 7, and Revelation 13, the Father will use a lion, a bear, a leopard, even a wild beast to remove the iron chestplate-caul upon the heart, (and no one knows the day or the hour). In that day Zerubbabel himself will remove the head-stone and there will be shouts: Grace! grace to him! (each in his or her own appointed times).

 

[rick357]

Actually, according to Paul, Messiah has been made the minister of the circumcision, (Romans 15:8) and according to Hosea 13, Daniel 7, and Revelation 13, the Father will use a lion, a bear, a leopard, even a wild beast to remove the iron chestplate-caul upon the heart, (and no one knows the day or the hour). In that day Zerubbabel himself will remove the head-stone and there will be shouts: Grace! grace to him! (each in his or her own appointed times).

Yes Paul is only the writer not the annointed

 

[CherubRam]

Interesting to read, especially in the light of the discussion topics of the forum over the years:

Dan Juster: The Dangers of Jewish Roots Movements.

I say, let the people figure it out. He said that Gentiles are not expected to keep the Sabbath. That is clearly wrong. The scriptures teach that the Gentiles are also to keep the Sabbath.

What does the HR stand for?

 

[pat34lee]

I say, let the people figure it out. He said that Gentiles are not expected to keep the Sabbath. That is clearly wrong. The scriptures teach that the Gentiles are also to keep the Sabbath.

What does the HR stand for?

HR is for Hebrew Roots, which means the original faith of the apostles, as we understand it. Both Judaism and Christianity are man-made religions formed hundreds of years after the fall of the temple.

 

[rick357]

HR is for Hebrew Roots, which means the original faith of the apostles, as we understand it. Both Judaism and Christianity are man-made religions formed hundreds of years after the fall of the temple.

By judaism I assume you mean rabbinic judaism...as the religion of second temple was called Judaism even in the Apostles day.

 

[pat34lee]

By judaism I assume you mean rabbinic judaism...as the religion of second temple was called Judaism even in the Apostles day.

Correct. Rabbinic Judaism was only a small sect in Yeshua's day.

 

[rick357]

Correct. Rabbinic Judaism was only a small sect in Yeshua's day.

Honestly if not for the temple being destroyed what we call judaism would probably be much differant. as I understand it rabbinic Judaism first gained popularity though not known by that name in the captivity of Babylon. rabbinic Judaism with its focus on the spirit and meaning of Torah makes it able to adapt even when there is no temple.

 

[pat34lee]

Honestly if not for the temple being destroyed what we call judaism would probably be much differant. as I understand it rabbinic Judaism first gained popularity though not known by that name in the captivity of Babylon. rabbinic Judaism with its focus on the spirit and meaning of Torah makes it able to adapt even when there is no temple.

Rabbinic Judaism picked up a lot of practices in Babylon. The problem is that we were told not to copy how the pagans serve their idols.
Deut. 12:29-31, Jer. 10:2

 

[Torah Emunah]

Because Yeshua said no man comes to the Father except by me....

Shalom, rick357. What exactly did he mean? Only Christians have access to the Creator because they believe in Jesus?

Messianic Judaism may look like rabbinic Judaism but it is very different.

I agree that they are very different. In what way do they look the same? I'm not sure what you mean by that?

 

[rick357]

Shalom, rick357. What exactly did he mean? Only Christians have access to the Creator because they believe in Jesus?

I agree that they are very different. In what way do they look the same? I'm not sure what you mean by that?

Thank you for your post...as to your first two questions there can not be a short answer as the wording assumes some things about the Father...Elohim...christianity...and Jesus that must be seen correctly for any answer to be correct...unfortunatly writing post are very much inferior to live discussion...but if you would want to discuss these things I could start a new thread using your question as its title
As to looking the same in as much as both believe that the covenant relationship between YHWH and Israel must be carried out in the way that was given by Moses.

 

[Torah Emunah]

Thank you for your post...as to your first two questions there can not be a short answer as the wording assumes some things about the Father...Elohim...christianity...and Jesus that must be seen correctly for any answer to be correct...unfortunatly writing post are very much inferior to live discussion...but if you would want to discuss these things I could start a new thread using your question as its title
As to looking the same in as much as both believe that the covenant relationship between YHWH and Israel must be carried out in the way that was given by Moses.

If that is what you are comfortable with that would be fine. I hope I am not upsetting the natural order of things around here? The questions seemed simple enough.

Shalom

 

[rick357]

If that is what you are comfortable with that would be fine. I hope I am not upsetting the natural order of things around here? The questions seemed simple enough.

Shalom

No youve made no problem...but I have found that often a short answer does not convey the answer because of individials understanding of certain words having great variety...for instance christian...in its original usage it has nothing to do with gentiles...but was meant as an insult from hellenistic disdain for those who were not willing to think for themselves but would follow in action belief and being a jewish Messiah....the disciples of the way took this as a compliment for they desired nothing more than to be exactly as he is.
Anouther may see christians as being gentiles who streangthened their already pagan beliefs by associating them with YHWH's scripture while denying everything said in it and making an arian messiah who hated the law the jews and made a way that performing the way of death didnt matter cause say the right words and its a get out of righteous wrath free card.
Also I dont want to derail the current subject so that would be why I suggested a new thread which I will start today....may he keep you, fill you with grace, and increase peace on you.

 

[Truthfrees]

Shalom, rick357. What exactly did he mean? Only Christians have access to the Creator because they believe in Jesus?

Abraham, Moses, David, the priests, prophets, judges, and many others had direct access to the Creator and were in right relationship with HIM.

Very good question.

May each person ask the L-ord to give them the right answer.

 

[Hoshiyya]

Regarding This site, that was linked to on page 1:

Is it just me, or is the term "Cultural Marxism" ... a bit weird ?