Saturday Sabbath??

[Andyman_1970]

Since we're on the "sin" tangent...............

An excerpt from the article, Theological Errors due to Seperation from Hebrew Roots

By: Dan Rodriguez

III. A world of difference exists between Judaism and traditional Christian theology when we come to the subject of sin. Judaism teaches that man is born good. He is not born a sinner. He becomes responsible for his sins at the age of 13 (12 for girls) when he becomes a "man of duty" (Bar-Mitzvah). Until this age, a child's sins are the responsibility of the parents. From the age of 13, he is considered a responsible adult who can choose not to sin. It is taught that man is born good, but has two opposing inclinations in him: One leads to the good, and the other to the bad. Paul dealt with the concept of the good and bad inclinations in Romans 7:17-21. Even the bad inclination is not evil in and of itself. If properly directed and controlled, it serves a useful purpose.

In contrast to this biblical concept, Christianity offers the doctrine original sin, beginning with Augustine (355-430), bishop of Hippo in Africa. He was the architect of an ideology that taught that the act of sex was the vehicle of original sin. (See D.J. Bailey, "Sexual Relations in Christian Thought," pg. 53-56; D. Feldman, Marital Relation, Birth Control and Abortion in Jewish Law, pg. 83-84) Augustine taught that the consequence of this sin is transmitted through the sexual act from one generation to the next. Because of this, a child, he said, was literally conceived in the "sin" of its parents. The connection between this idea and the doctrine of Immaculate Conception and Virgin Birth should be obvious.

Sin should be understood as defiance and rebellion to divine law. It is not a hereditary evil. It should be clear that if there did exist such a thing as "original sin," transferred from one generation to the next, this would undermine man's divine right to a free will. Man would no- longer be a free moral agent. Man, contrary to this, has to choose the good and reject the evil; overcome the evil with good. (For an analysis of this see S. Schechter, Aspects of Rabbinic Theology, New York: Schocken Books, 1961, pp. 242-263.)

 

[eldermike]

Since we're on the "sin" tangent...............

An excerpt from the article, Theological Errors due to Seperation from Hebrew Roots

By: Dan Rodriguez

A man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus... by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified... if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly. (Gal. 2:16,21)

 

[Andyman_1970]

A man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus... by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified... if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly. (Gal. 2:16,21)

I've never advocated that the "Law" does save, or score one points............Hebrew roots and being observant to Torah are not the same thing.

As I stated about 2 or 3 pages ago, no where does Torah or the OT declare one can earn their right standing before God by observing Torah.........observing Torah was the outward manifestation of one's faith in God...........kind of like our Baptism is today, an outward sign of an inward change.

 

[ZiSunka]

I've never advocated that the "Law" does save, or score one points............Hebrew roots and being observant to Torah are not the same thing.

As I stated about 2 or 3 pages ago, no where does Torah or the OT declare one can earn their right standing before God by observing Torah.........observing Torah was the outward manifestation of one's faith in God...........kind of like our Baptism is today, an outward sign of an inward change.

So if observing the law was an outward sign of faith in the OT days and baptism is one sign today, why still keep the law? If we keep any part of the law, aren't we judged by the whole law?

Didn't God institute the law so people would know what sin is?

 

[mont974x4]

Going back to the end of page 8....except that baptism doesn't save anyone. As was mentioned in an above post, it is an outward sign of the inward change. Baptism before salvation is little more than a public dunking.

 

[ZiSunka]

page 8?

 

[eldermike]

So if observing the law was an outward sign of faith in the OT days and baptism is one sign today, why still keep the law? If we keep any part of the law, aren't we judged by the whole law?

Didn't God institute the law so people would know what sin is?

I would only add: and to point us to Christ.

 

[ZiSunka]

I would only add: and to point us to Christ.

Very good point. Sorry I left that out.

If we didn't feel the weight of sin that we get from reading the law, we wouldn't understand our need for help getting out from under the weight of those laws and that sin.

 

[mont974x4]

Sorry, I meant page 8 of this thread.

As to the Law, I agree, as Paul says in Romans, without the Law he wouldn't know he was guilty of covetousness without the law and he wouldn't know that he needed Christ. (please forgive the paraphrasing)

 

[ZiSunka]

There are only 5 pages in this thread. :?:

 

[eldermike]

Very good point. Sorry I left that out.

If we didn't feel the weight of sin that we get from reading the law, we wouldn't understand our need for help getting out from under the weight of those laws and that sin.

Yep.

Jesus dropped the word bomb of all time right on the law, in the sermon on the mount with just a few simple words. "Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is Perfect"

Game over.

 

[Andyman_1970]

So if observing the law was an outward sign of faith in the OT days and baptism is one sign today, why still keep the law? If we keep any part of the law, aren't we judged by the whole law?

Didn't God institute the law so people would know what sin is?

I don't believe I've ever advocated for anyone to follow Torah or that they had to follow Torah.

Why is it when people see "Law" in my posts they don't read the rest of it???

 

[eldermike]

I don't believe I've ever advocated for anyone to follow Torah or that they had to follow Torah.

Why is it when people see "Law" in my posts they don't read the rest of it???

I am not misunderstanding you but there are others that read these threads and any of us are eaisly misunderstood.

 

[Andyman_1970]

I am not misunderstanding you but there are others that read these threads and any of us are eaisly misunderstood.

I agree............it's easy to read something into something when posting vs. a face to face conversation.

Shalom Mike...........

 

[mont974x4]

Maybe it's a setting issue as it affects the number of posts shown per page based on the how the user configured his or her control panel. lol I have 10 pages for this thread. Maybe I should indicate post numbers instead? I apologize for any confusion.

 

[ZiSunka]

I don't believe I've ever advocated for anyone to follow Torah or that they had to follow Torah.

Why is it when people see "Law" in my posts they don't read the rest of it???

I'm still trying to figure out where the Bible says that a child's sins are on the parents until age 13?

Where does the Bible even mention the parent's receiving the weight of the child's sin and where is the age 13 mentioned?

 

[Andyman_1970]

I'm still trying to figure out where the Bible says that a child's sins are on the parents until age 13?

Where does the Bible even mention the parent's receiving the weight of the child's sin and where is the age 13 mentioned?

That was certainly the understanding in the tradition Jesus came from.

This brings up one of the "problems" IMO with Sola Scriptura, or the idea that the NT can be accurately understood with only the OT........many of the ideas and teachings of the Oral Torah were in place in the setting Jesus came out of, He even references them and uses them to "get around" some of the tricky religious leaders in the Gospels (indicating He was familiar with the Oral Tradition).

While I would never advocate that the Oral Torah is binding on a Gentile follower of Jesus it sure sheds alot of light on the culture and background of the Gospels. (the bold and underline are for clarification lest someone misunderstand me and think I was indicating the Oral Torah is binding for us today... )

So where have I advocated where one must be Torah observant??

 

[mont974x4]

I don't know who mentioned 13 as an age? I know traditionally that is the Jewish age but I don't remember a specific age being set in Scripture as the age of accountability.

2Ch 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign; and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah.



This would indicate that we can be judged as either doing evil or righteousness earlier than most people say or think. As I said in an earlier post, I don't see any set age of accountability in the Bible and that leads me to believe that it is a personal thing between the individual and God. He knows the hearts of each of us. This would also allow for His grace when dealing with those with mental handicaps that may not fully understand the gospel until much later.

If we look at other kings in the OT, specifically in 1,2 Kings and 1,2 Chronicles we often see them described as either doing acts of evil or of righteousness along with a comparison to their fathers. While this does not say specific sins are passed down through generations it does indicate the general heart attitude and the importance of raising children in a godly way.

Wayne Grudem, in his book Christian Beliefs, defines sin this way:
any failure to conform to God's moral law in act, attitude, or nature.

Eph 2:1 And you did he make alive, when ye were dead through your trespasses and sins,
Eph 2:2 wherein ye once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the powers of the air, of the spirit that now worketh in the sons of disobedience;
Eph 2:3 among whom we also all once lived in the lust of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest: -
Eph 2:4 but God, being rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Eph 2:5 even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace have ye been saved),
Eph 2:6 and raised us up with him, and made us to sit with him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus:
Eph 2:7 that in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus:
Eph 2:8 for by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
Eph 2:9 not of works, that no man should glory.
Psa 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.
Rom 5:11 And not only so , but we are also boasting in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom now we did receive the reconciliation;
Rom 5:12 because of this, even as through one man the sin did enter into the world, and through the sin the death; and thus to all men the death did pass through, for that all did sin;
Rom 5:13 for till law sin was in the world: and sin is not reckoned when there is not law;
Rom 5:14 but the death did reign from Adam till Moses, even upon those not having sinned in the likeness of Adam's transgression, who is a type of him who is coming.
Rom 5:15 But, not as the offence so also is the free gift; for if by the offence of the one the many did die, much more did the grace of God, and the free gift in grace of the one man Jesus Christ, abound to the many;
Rom 5:16 and not as through one who did sin is the free gift, for the judgment indeed is of one to condemnation, but the gift is of many offences to a declaration of `Righteous,'
Rom 5:17 for if by the offence of the one the death did reign through the one, much more those, who the abundance of the grace and of the free gift of the righteousness are receiving, in life shall reign through the one--Jesus Christ.
Rom 5:18 So, then, as through one offence to all men it is to condemnation, so also through one declaration of `Righteous' it is to all men to justification of life;
Rom 5:19 for as through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners: so also through the obedience of the one, shall the many be constituted righteous.
Rom 5:20 And law came in, that the offence might abound, and where the sin did abound, the grace did overabound,
Rom 5:21 that even as the sin did reign in the death, so also the grace may reign, through righteousness, to life age-during, through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[ZiSunka]

That was certainly the understanding in the tradition Jesus came from.

This brings up one of the "problems" IMO with Sola Scriptura, or the idea that the NT can be accurately understood with only the OT........many of the ideas and teachings of the Oral Torah were in place in the setting Jesus came out of, He even references them and uses them to "get around" some of the tricky religious leaders in the Gospels (indicating He was familiar with the Oral Tradition).

While I would never advocate that the Oral Torah is binding on a Gentile follower of Jesus it sure sheds alot of light on the culture and background of the Gospels. (the bold and underline are for clarification lest someone misunderstand me and think I was indicating the Oral Torah is binding for us today... )

So where have I advocated where one must be Torah observant??

It's interesting that you believe that Jesus came from a tradition of bar mitzvah, since this is something that can't be directly traced back any earlier than the 12th century. Prior to that, children were permitted to perform many of the functions of the mitzvah without having any kind of "coming of age" ceremony. The ritual of the bar mitzvah as we know it today developed in the 19th century and was (and still is) a source of much controversy between the more conservative sects and the more liberal sects. The conservative sects wanted to maintain the system of calling a boy up for his first reading of the Torah without having any kind of ceremony, but the more liberal sects felt having a coming of age ceremony was something to celebrate. Almost immediately bar mitzvahs became party events among American Jews.

It developed its "confirmation" aspect in abouit 1846, when Rabbi Mayer Wise wrote a confirmation ceremony to be done in conjunction with the bar mitzvah to echo the Catholic system of spiritual confirmation of children who reach the "age of responsibility."

Originally this ceremony took place at the bar mitzvah, but some sects now perform the confirmation at 16 or 17 years old. Some even delay it to the 21st birthday, signifying the end of childhood and the beginning of eligibility for marriage and the responsibilities of a family. It is done at this age because of God's exempting young men 20 years or younger from being forbidden to enter the promised land; most Judaic scholars agree this age was set because before that point, a young man is not considered to have full faculty to make wise decisions.

There is no evidence that any such ceremony would have been observed during the days of Christ.

So you aren't advocating that a gentile follower of Christ observe the Torah? Are you aware there is no longer Jew or Gentile in the eyes of the Lord?

 

[Andyman_1970]

It's interesting that you believe that Jesus came from a tradition of bar mitzvah, since this is something that can't be directly traced back any earlier than the 12th century. Prior to that, children were permitted to perform many of the functions of the mitzvah without having any kind of "coming of age" ceremony. The ritual of the bar mitzvah as we know it today developed in the 19th century and was (and still is) a source of much controversy between the more conservative sects and the more liberal sects. The conservative sects wanted to maintain the system of calling a boy up for his first reading of the Torah without having any kind of ceremony, but the more liberal sects felt having a coming of age ceremony was something to celebrate. Almost immediately bar mitzvahs became party events among American Jews.

It developed its "confirmation" aspect in abouit 1846, when Rabbi Mayer Wise wrote a confirmation ceremony to be done in conjunction with the bar mitzvah to echo the Catholic system of spiritual confirmation of children who reach the "age of responsibility."

Originally this ceremony took place at the bar mitzvah, but some sects now perform the confirmation at 16 or 17 years old. Some even delay it to the 21st birthday, signifying the end of childhood and the beginning of eligibility for marriage and the responsibilities of a family. It is done at this age because of God's exempting young men 20 years or younger from being forbidden to enter the promised land; most Judaic scholars agree this age was set because before that point, a young man is not considered to have full faculty to make wise decisions.

There is no evidence that any such ceremony would have been observed during the days of Christ.

Actually in Luke 2, there is a reference to Jesus and the concept of being a full member of the community. Jewish boys from the Galilee area (more orthodox than the Judean area) were only allowed go to Jerusalem for Passover if they had completed the bet sefer portion of their education (memorization of the Torah for one). They were permitted to go to Jerusalem and present the Passover lamb at the Temple on behalf of their family as was the custom of the day. This was an informal bar mitzvah if you will and indicated to the community that this boy was ready to move on to the bet Talmud portion of their education.

This is way off the OP, so if you'd like to continue this please PM me. I don't want to bring down the wrath of the topic police here.

So you aren't advocating that a gentile follower of Christ observe the Torah? Are you aware there is no longer Jew or Gentile in the eyes of the Lord?

I’m not aware of any passage in the NT where Jews who accept Jesus as the Messiah are commanded to stop being Jewish.