Submitting Torah Observance To New Covenant Principles

[Gxg (G²)]

If Contramundum does not want to come out to play, you can see all the for and against positions (and scriptures) at First Fruits of Zion website. They call it One Law vs Torah by Divine Intervention. They took the latter position last year and had a big split in their organization and membership.

It's not about whether or not Grace was operating in the Old Testament or whether NT believer's are free to do whatever they please. This been kicked around like a dead horse and seems to be a focal point of the discussion even when the other guy is not really defending this.


Here's a problem I have observed over the years. (SOME) Gentile believers are not happy with their denomination's out of context view of Christianity; and rightly so!
They seek all the info they can get and gain a much larger appreciation and enrichment of their faith . They become Torah Observant, call themselves Jews and seek to imitate Rabbinic Judaism with customs and attitudes that were not around when the Apostles were around.

Next comes a prideful attitude over TO and an angry attitude towards the Church. They become scornful to Jewish Christians. Before you know it, they are finding fault in New Testament scriptures and renounce belief in Yeshua and convert to Judaism. I've seen it happen here approx 10 times over the years at CF.

I have been to two local MJ assemblies and have friends in both and have not experienced this (except on the internet), so I'm not coming against MJ nor making a generalization over the whole movement.

Torah observance and level one takes is OK with me. It's ones motivation and attitude toward Torah Observance that makes the difference.

I'll probably catch some heat over this but it's worth mentioning since many impressionable people are drawn to this part of the forum.

Spot on

 

[INTJ-F]

Concerning Yeshua and the adulterous woman: It's already been mentioned that the man should have been present, but wasn't.
John 8:4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

Am I the only one who thought they could have already stoned the man to death and then decided to use the woman to see what Yeshua would say to do to her? Just because the man was not mentioned does not mean he "got away with it"

 

[GuardianShua]

Hello CM,

Thanks for adding your thoughts to this thread. My thoughts regarding the MJ teachings distorting the historicity of Paul is nothing new. What is new is my analysis of how and why TOMJs choose to believe a lie, especially with regards to believing the "BIG LIE". They have been indoctrinated to believe that Grace Oriented teachings will strip them of their Jewishness. So despite their knowledge of scripture they will choose the lie (Heretic Paul and/or Rav Shaul).

In Messiah's grace,

meslit

We are indeed saved by God's grace, but a faith without the works of the laws is a dead faith. Righteousness does not come by faith alone, but by putting the law into practice also. Because we are not perfect it is necessary for God to extend His Grace for us.

 

[visionary]

Am I the only one who thought they could have already stoned the man to death and then decided to use the woman to see what Yeshua would say to do to her? Just because the man was not mentioned does not mean he "got away with it"

Never thought of that...

In together.. die together.. was my thought
What would be the Lord's reasoning to pardon the woman if the man has already paid for the crime? Why didn't the accusers mention this little fact?

 

[INTJ-F]

Never thought of that...

In together.. die together.. was my thought
What would be the Lord's reasoning to pardon the woman if the man has already paid for the crime? Why didn't the accusers mention this little fact?

Why did one on the cross receive forgiveness and the other one apparently not? Why were some of the Israelis in the wilderness punished with death but others were spared.

Could have been the guy was under the age of accountability (20) --- regardless they did not mention what happened to him and it's just speculation

 

[visionary]

I always thought it was either one of those who was part of the gang of religious thugs that had thrown the woman down before His feet, or one of their sons... increasing the reasoning they had for wanting to stone her.

 

[yedida]

Am I the only one who thought they could have already stoned the man to death and then decided to use the woman to see what Yeshua would say to do to her? Just because the man was not mentioned does not mean he "got away with it"

The Jews already answered that when they told Pilate that they had no law to put a man to death. They were under Roman rule. They were allowed to follow much of their "religion" but they were not able to carry out their capital punishments, Rome had to do that for them - as we're told when they wanted Yeshua arrested and killed. Without Rome's blessings, they could not have killed the Lamb for Passover.

 

[visionary]

Are we going to see that again... when the temple services start again... without Rome's blessings, they will not be able to kill the Lamb for the Passover?

 

[yedida]

Are we going to see that again... when the temple services start again... without Rome's blessings, they will not be able to kill the Lamb for the Passover?

I certainly can't say what Israel would do in the future. And I can only answer for that which happened in the past with their own words. If they were unable to put Yeshua to death then it stands to reason that they had not put the man to death, ergo, there was no man involved. And Yeshua was not the person that they should have taken the woman to (nor the couple) for condemnation or the go-ahead with the sentence as prescribed by their law. Yeshua, during his lifetime, here on this earth, was not a member of the Sanhedrin, not even of a small local bet din, he had no authority (in his earthly walk) to put anyone to death as a legal civil punishment.

 

[visionary]

I certainly can't say what Israel would do in the future. And I can only answer for that which happened in the past with their own words. If they were unable to put Yeshua to death then it stands to reason that they had not put the man to death, ergo, there was no man involved. And Yeshua was not the person that they should have taken the woman to (nor the couple) for condemnation or the go-ahead with the sentence as prescribed by their law. Yeshua, during his lifetime, here on this earth, was not a member of the Sanhedrin, not even of a small local bet din, he had no authority (in his earthly walk) to put anyone to death as a legal civil punishment.

NOw you got me wondering if there were nine men and they were looking for the tenth man to make up the ben din

 

[visionary]

The bet din, literally translated as "house of judgement," originated during the period of the Second Temple, and was known as the Sanhedrin.... Bet Din

 

[TertiusC]

Hate when it feels that something you become aware of only later comes into view...and the light-bulb comes on . For I just realized not too long ago that you were Marshall Beeber, one of the Messianic Jewish teachers I really appreciated growing up!!!!


Thanks for noting as you did, especially with your analogies that you offered with the Bus concept. I've loved keeping up with the Messianic Literary Corner, though I was surprised to see that you actually have posted over here---as it seemed from your site that you may've been involved elsewhere. But I really enjoyed many of the things I was able to learn from your ministry of "Messianic Literary Corner"---and I've referenced your work before here. I saw you over with my other Messianic brothers/sisters at "The Rosh Pina Project" site a number of times when it came to discussing the Torah...as seen when they were discussing Antinomian Theology Within The TOM-J Movement

Again, many thanks for sharing as you did--as I agree 100% with where you're coming from (As do others) and its something that needs to be remembered within Messianic Judaism.

I understand you respect the man, but his analogy is flawed and his assertion that the Galatians once observed Torah before they turned to Messiah is mistaken.

One's teacher teaches one how to live (in this example), should you then ignore what you are taught? The analogy falls down very quickly. In the context of the rest of scripture, even further.

Stating that 4:9 is about Torah is nothing less than absurd. In the same way that saying that 4:10 points to the observance of the Hebrew feasts. It's just not true, a complete fabrication. If you look at 4:3 you'll see what he (author of Galatians) was talking about, this is the simplest rule of interpretation, context.

Some use Galatians to attack Messianic observance of Torah, but there's just nothing in it that aids this attack. I'm observant and love Galatians.

Be careful.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I understand you respect the man, but his analogy is flawed and his assertion that the Galatians once observed Torah before they turned to Messiah is mistaken.

One's teacher teaches one how to live (in this example), should you then ignore what you are taught? The analogy falls down very quickly. In the context of the rest of scripture, even further.

Stating that 4:9 is about Torah is nothing less than .

Shalom.

I understand that you disagree with the man's perspective--and that's fine. However, it doesn't seem to be dealing with the text plainly if trying to say that the Galatians did not have a "Torah Observance" mindset when it came to what Paul sought to correct them on....for they were Gentiles and never bound to do all things within the Torah anyhow, counter to what the Judaizers desired when trying to condemn them for not keeping the Mosaic code/getting circumcised. This is what Paul noted plainly in Galatians 2-3...and Galatians 5:1-15 and Galatians 5:13-15 when it came to the issue of love being the summation of what the Lord desires.

To me, there've been too many Messianic Teachers/organizations who've taught on that very relality on what it means to live by the Torah, how it has changed in the New Covenant, and what it meant for Gentiles who were never bound to the Mosaic Code. Dr. Michael Brown is one of the other Messianics who has also taught on that very reality when it comes to asking if Jews could be saved/redeemed by their Torah Observance.

Stating that 4:9 is about Torah is nothing less than absurd. In the same way that saying that 4:10 points to the observance of the Hebrew feasts. It's just not true, a complete fabrication. If you look at 4:3 you'll see what he (author of Galatians) was talking about, this is the simplest rule of interpretation, context

I disagree.....for IMHO, when reading the text with a chapter/verse mindset, it can be easy to try and seperate things from their foundation on which they were built. However, originally Paul was writing a letter that didn't have any of the later additions which were given to the text---and thus continuation of thought must be kept in mind.

I think the text is pretty plain on the continuation of what Paul was discussing in Galatians 3 when it came to his noting on becoming sons of Abraham through faith rather than through the law, whoch was a schoolmaster (Galatians 3:19-29)--and many scholars have no issue in acknowledging the directness of Paul when it came to his using the illustration of slavery to show that before Christ came and died for sins, people were in bondage to the Law...thinking they could be saved by it. Jesus was born of a woman (Human), as a Jew subject to God's Law and fulfilled it perfectly...becoming the perfect sacrifice (Galatians 4:4-5) and making it possible for us to be adopted. He never said that the Law itself was counter to God, as mentioned in Galatians 3:18-21. For it revealed God's will/nature and showed people how to live...but it also pointed to people's sins and showed them it was impossible to please God by trying to obey his laws completely. All 613 of them, many of which required DEATH for failure.

The Covenant with Abraham, as Paul noted, showed that faith was the only way to be saved...and when God gave his promise to Abraham, he did it by himself alone---without angels or Moses as mediators. This is why Paul mentioned the issue in Galatians 3:20, as it concerns how the Jews believed that the 10 commandments had been given to Moses by angels (Acts 7:53)...and Paul was showing the superiorty of salvation and growth by faith over trying to be saved by keeping the Jewish laws. As Galatians 3:24-25 makes clear, the Law was meant to teach on the NEED for salvation...whereas God's grace gives us that salvation. The Mosaic code was never the means for that salvation, as Paul noted in Galatians 4:21-31 when Paulw as comparing the Law to Hagar and Grace to Sarah.

Of course, one can see it as a "fabrication" if they wish---but one would be forcing the text to say what they wish it to say if not seeing the larger context that Paul was speaking in when it came to his discussing the Covenant of Grace being superior to anything previously. That doesn't make the Law of NO relevance---but it is not the means for justification. Paul in Galatians 4:15 sensed that the Galatians had lost the joy of their salvation because of legalism..... If one wishes to keep it out of a desire to please the Lord/grow, that's a beautiful things. However, one will always get into danger when it comes to thinking that one's observance is what enables them to be pleasing to the Lord. Even Peter noted that in Acts 15:9-10.

Some use Galatians to attack Messianic observance of Torah, but there's just nothing in it that aids this attack. I'm observant and love Galatians.

More than understand---and to be clear, I'm not AGAINST Torah observance. For even Paul himself was that in many ways when it came to his referencing the Law for examples of living/illustrations. It was apart of his heritage--and Jesus said it was a blessing for others to bring out the old treasures from the storehouse alongside the new (Matthew 13:52). Where I draw the line is when people try to make Torah Observance MANDATORY for all and look down upon others for not doing as they, seeing how no one truly keeps the Torah as the OT demanded ...and its all about your heart's motive. If one's doing so from a grace-centered perspective or a legalism centered perspective..



I'm for the mindset that the way Torah is observed within the NT is not what should be done as it was in the OT.


In Hebrews 13:8, for example, the sacrifices were considered to be "praise" we give to the Lord---in remembrance of Leviticus 7:12 and Psalm 50:14 and what the scriptures say in I Peter 2:5 about us now being priests/God's new design (temple included)...and in context with the Book, the Jews following Christ were being persecuted at one point due to their faith and distancing from aspects in Judaism. If these Jewish Christians, because of their witness to the Messiah, could no longer worship with other Jews, they could consider praise their sacrifice----one they could offer anywhere and anytime. This must have reminded them of the prophet Hosea's words, "Take away all of their inquity and recieve us graciously so we will render the calvesof our lips" (Hosea 14:2). A sacrifice of praise today would include thanking CHrist for His sacrifice on the Cross and telling others about it....and as Paul mentioned in Romans 12:1-3, our lives are now to be a living sacrifice. These Christians could now be encouraged in their Jewishness, despite how Hebrews 10:32-39 describes the massive persecution that the Hebraic Christians were facing ...






As Messianic Jew, Daniel Stern, said in his commentary on Hebrews 10:

Notice that God does not take away the Torah; rathe, he takes away the first system of sacrifices and priesthood in order to set up the second within the framework of the one eternal Torah.

Moreover, it is not neccessary to suppose that this "taking away" prohibts all animal sacrifices by the Levitical priesthood. The author's point relates only to the sin offerings: "an offering of sins is no longer needed" because the second sin offering system is effectual in a way the first never was..and the other animal sacrifices and the Levitical priesthood could be continued without eclipsing the preeminent role of Yeshua's once-for-all sacrifice and eternal high-priesthood.. Even the sin-offering ritual could be continued, but only if it were regarded as a memorial and not as effective in itself. Just as it was never more than a "shadow", so now, if it should be resumed (which would presuppose the rebuilding of the Temple at some future time), it could not be more than a reminder of the great deliverance provided in Yeshua's death as our final and permanently effective sin offering and his resurrection as our chohen gadol.


Having God's Torah written on one's heart and mind necessarily implies that God has forgiven one's sins, so that an offering for sins is no longer needed. Therefore, readers of this sermon should free themselves from their compulsion to offer animal sacrifices as sin offerings and instead be fully assured of the sufficiency of Yeshua's sacrifice of himself on their behalf. We moderns have no such compulsion, but we too should be convinced of the necessity of blood sacrifice for sin while having assurance that Yeshuas blood sacrifice fulfills the requirement. With this, the author's major argument is completed.

But the author is very specific in limiting what he says. An offering for sins is no longer needed and ruled out. But the other sacrificial offerings remain part of God's order even after Yeshua's death, as proven by Sha'ul's activity in the temple at Acts 21:25-27/ Acts 21 and his own offering of sacrifices which he himself speaks of at Acts 24:16-18 /Acts 24.

With the destruction of the temple, sacrifical offerings became impossible; but if the temple is rebuilt, thank offerings, meal offerings, and praise offerings may be offered once again. The author of this letter does not proclaim the end of the sacrifical system in its entirety, only the end of animal sacrifices for sin.
​

Praying that what I stated made sense.

In the event I say it wrongly, one view to consider is that of Dr.Michael Brown---as seen in Can Jewish People Be Saved Without Believing in Jesus? and The Rosh Pina Project ( an alternative look at Messianic Jews ): The Law of Messiah . But if knowing who the SCRIBES/Teachers of the Law were........alongside how Jesus instructed his followers to obey what the Pharisees/Scribes taught (Matt. 23:23), as some were not far from the kingdom of God (Mark 12:34), the text is clear.

Matthew 5:16-18 / Matthew 5

The Fulfillment of the Law

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
​

When Jesus speaks on "until heaven and earth pass away" in Matthew 5, he confirms the full authority of the OT as scripture for all time..even down to the smallest components of the text. The OT remains authoratitive compendium of divine testimony and teaching, within which some elements (such as sacrifices/the sacrifical system looking onward to his great sacrifice and other ceremonial laws) predicted or foreshadowed events that would be accomplished in Jesus's ministry ( Galatians 4:10 and Galatians 5:1) and so are not models for Christian behavior.

That specific train of thought is the one that I've been the most influenced by during my experiences within the Messianic Jewish camp. For me, the law being "fulfilled" seems to make room for differing things...and in many ways, its a matter of new principles/dynamics implemented that make the need for older things in a contract to no longer be necessary. Some of the dynamics are similar to what went down in the Book of Esther, when the King made a decree to kill all the Jews...but was unable to reverse it once change of mind happened since no law signed by the king could be repealed...and in response, a new law was made that made it difficult or impossible to implement the first, Esther 8:9.

It's like amending a Constitution over time to make room for newer developments. If/when God has made clear a LAW is no longer in effect due to it being altered, its assumption to think another's breaking the law...no more different due to others thinking the U.S Constitution isn't supported by others due to how it has been amended with the changing times, whether it be with women's rights or the Civil Rights acts/Slavery.





Paul Himself had such a mindset----for Paul spoke and wrote proudly that he is, not was, a Pharisee (Acts 23:6; Phil. 3:5), yet his understanding of the Kingdom of Christ/its principles helped him to appreciate the Old with the New. It is why it was clear from text that he felt the OT had principles to learn from it in the multiple times he referenced it—-whether in 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 in citing the examples of the failures of the Israelites with sexual immorality/grumbling and saying they happened as OUR EXAMPLES/WARNINGS for us today….or in his citing of Deuteronomy 25:3-5 when it came to Church Planters in 1 Corinthians 9:8-10/ 1 Corinthians 9 (and also, 1 Timothy 5:17-19 ) concerning supporting. The same goes for Paul in his referencing/citing Exodus 16:17-19 in regards to gathering when he spoke on being a generous giver in 2 Corinthians 8:14-16. Add to that 2 Corinthians 4:12-14 when he referenced Psalm 116:10. Dozens of other examples besides this, as well as plenty of scholary books/references on the issue of how those within the first 3 centuries of the Church actually referenced the examples of the saints for Church Practice/Encouragement.

Shalom, friend

 

[Gxg (G²)]

If Contramundum does not want to come out to play, you can see all the for and against positions (and scriptures) at First Fruits of Zion website. They call it One Law vs Torah by Divine Intervention. They took the latter position last year and had a big split in their organization and membership.

It's not about whether or not Grace was operating in the Old Testament or whether NT believer's are free to do whatever they please. .

First Fruits of Zion is a pretty intriguing website.....

 

[Lulav]

Marshall, I am not sure if you are still hanging around here or not but I would like to respond to this. I am going to go through you post and pose some question and replies within.

There is only one Gospel whose power and gracious freedom overcomes sin and death throughout the world.

And what Gospel is this? Please explain in detail as in the NT there are described more than one.

But if the Gospel's freedom is suppressed for the sake of upholding the Law (Torah), then those that put Torah above the Gospel must abandon the contradictory elements of their theology and submit their Torah observance to New Covenant principles.

How can an inanimate thing (the gospel) have a 'freedom', please explain.

The Torah should always come first, it is the standard, the benchmark the gauge, by which anything that succeeds it should be measured by and it must be in agreement with. There should be nothing that supersedes it.

If you see contradictory elements between the Torah and the NC, then it is the NC that has the problem not the torah and as such that (the NC 'principles') should be the ones to be adjusted.

Just what do YOU see as contradictory?


This does not mandate the banning of Torah observance; however, it does restrict Torah observance to that of "non-obligatory" compliance in Messianic Jewish worship and daily practice.

PLease explain. Where is there any 'non obligatory' compliance in Torah?


In Messianic congregations in the USA and abroad, doctrinal error due to explicit Torah observance appears to be wide spread.

And what do you perceive to be this widespread doctrinal error, and what is 'explicit Torah observance'?

One must ask; Is it that hard to determine error from correct doctrine?

That proposes that you believe that those involved in this are purposely practicing in error.

What initially appeared to be a clear-cut issue of historical inaccuracy and miss-interpretation of Scripture twenty years ago, today appears to be a mute point among most Messianic brethren.

And what is this historical inaccuracy and misinterpretation? Why so vague?


Why so? Some of this lack of interest in historical and biblical accuracy is due to the human tendency to accept only the interpretation of scripture that fits one's doctrinal stand, no matter how absurd it may be.

I agree, many do this, as well as trust others to tell them what to think.


The other tendency is to believe false doctrine simply because it has not been rejected yet by its constituency. In either case, the reasons for accepting such doctrine are weak indeed.

OK

In the 1980s some Messianic Jewish teachers came up with the idea that they could reshape Messianic believers perception of the "Gospel of Grace" and "Torah Observance" by simply re-inventing the persona of the Apostle Paul into the "Torah Observant "Rabbi Shaul", all accepting of modern Messianic Jewish thought.

And the key words here are 'perception' or better yet, a paradigm shift, as well as he "Torah Observant "Rabbi Shaul".

In doing so, they had to develop an approach that would disregard the accurate history of Paul in his evolution from "Saul of Tarsus" persecutor of the Church in Israel and the Diaspora, to "the Apostle Paul", church founder, teacher and evangelist to both Jew and Gentile alike.

Agreed

They would have to sell to their flock the idea that Paul remained Torah observant, even while ministering to the Gentiles in the Greco/Roman provinces of Asia Minor.

Not to mention that he was (observant) previously in his hometown of pagan Tarsus.

They also had to assert that the proselytes of Rav Shaul were Torah observant. The task of selling this "spin" was simple for most of the devoted believers within the Messianic Jewish movement, but much less so for those educated in Church history and New Covenant teachings. Was this error one of confusion or design on the part of some Messianic leaders? I am sure we will know one day.

Yes we will and many will be vindicated.

To be more specific, in the mid-90’s David Stern’s revolutionary book , "The Messianic Jewish Manifesto" started turning belief towards strict Torah Observance. I believe that Stern’s intent was that of dismantling the "Pauline" teachings of Grace, to revert back to the Law. He and other supportive Messianic Jews resented the teachings of Grace having supremacy over Torah.

Yes, I have it and have read it, it is a good piece of propaganda that fit the time. I can't say that Stern's intent was to 'revert' everyone back to the law but instead to make the message more appealing to Jews.

And I don't believe in any supremacy of Grace of Torah, they walk hand and hand.

He therefore intentionally rebelled against New Covenant doctrine believing that Jews would not accept any Gospel except one that was totally Torah observant.

Again what is this doctrine you speak of? And I really don't think that was his intention, seeing how many Jews that became MJ's were either Reform or came from an abandoned beliefs system in Judaism. If they weren't following the Torah as Jews in Judaism, why would they do so in Christianity?


In doing this, he and other supportive teachers adopted a dangerously heretical course. Strict Torah observance has now become the standard in much of the Messianic Jewish movement. Stern's book adopts a "Social Darwinist" form of deception by promoting an erroneous historical portrait of Paul to conform to his religious and social agenda. Social Darwinists justify promoting the "big lie" if it serves to promote the continuity of their social cause. It may have been a 'Freudian slip" when Stern used the term "manifesto" in his revolutionary book. Stern's use of Marx missed the Biblical mark!

Yes, I always found the title to be a bit 'off'. However his version of Paul is no different than the Christian version, except one went one way, and one went the other and neither got it right.


There are also erroneous motivations underlying Torah Observant Messianic Jewish believer's acceptance of either the "Rav Shaul" or "Heretic Paul" historical scenarios. If you read between the lines in some of their statements, you will find that Torah Observant Messianic believers who know their history only give "lip service" supporting "Rav Shaul", and are actually Anti-Paul and consider his teachings heretical. In the USA, most Anti-Pauline Messianic Jewish believers hide behind the "Rav Shaul' history nonsense.

I've rarely come across these, where are they all?


In Israel though, most Anti-Paul MJs do not hide their sentiments concerning their oppostion to Pauline doctrine. Most Messianic Jews that support the Rav Shaul or Heretic Paul historical scenario, do so for the sake of what they perceive to be a necessity. They truly believe that only by holding to an erroneous viewpoint that supports obligatory Torah Observance will they successfully evangelize the Jewish people.

It is good to know that there is so much opposition, even if disguised.

We should question Torah Observant Messianic Jewish doctrine seriously by first concentrating on the teachings in the epistles to the Hebrews, Romans and Galatians. Above all the other apostles, Paul was given the divine task of proclaiming the principles of the New Covenant to Jew and Gentile believer alike. Let us endeavor to take His new revelation to heart. The "Messianic Literary Corner" has published a study series entitled "Submitting Torah Observance To New Covenant Principles" to discuss this very important doctrinal topic.

You are making an assumption here of Paul's 'task'. I don't believe this was from anyone but his own delusions. He first tried his speil on the Jews, didn't work, they realized he was teaching against the Torah which made him a false Prophet, that is why he turned to the ignorant gentiles who didn't know any better and because he was such a great orator, he could bs his way through anything.

Just what do you think was Paul's 'new revelation' and why did only he have it and why was it at odds with those who ate, sleep, traveled, preached, healed, baptized, etc, with Yeshua?

 

[Lulav]

Steve,

How many examples would you like? Diet, sabbath, holidays, liturgical garb, etc. Below are NC scriptural verses written by the Apostle Paul, not Rav Shaul. Obviously Rav Shaul would never say such a thing, so there must be another interpretation!

My first reference is: Colossians 2:16 "Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day."

My second reference is: 1 Corinthians 10:23-27 "Everything is permissible"--but not everything is beneficial. Everything is permissible--but not everything is constructive. Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others.​

My third reference in the area of food is: Romans 14:14 "As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean"​

Oh my, I guess I should have read through a bit more. Soooooooooooooo

How many examples would you like? Diet, sabbath, holidays, liturgical garb, etc.

You believe all this was done away with, nailed to the cross, etc?

That means you believe you can eat like a heathen, change the day that G-d blesses and sanctified, stop honoring his moedim, and not obey that which reminds us to obey? (e.g. tzitiot)

You basically are a Christian, everything is permissible? there are no laws to follow, do whatever you want you are covered by 'grace'.

Something is unclean, not because a man gets to decide if it is or not, it is because G-d himself declared it so!

This is what I have to say to that and to those who practice it:

In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes. ~ Judges 17:6



There was 'no king' meaning they did not listen to the King of the Universe who had told them what was right.

He said, "If you listen carefully to the voice of the L-RD your God and do what is right in HIS eyes,

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.~ Proverbs 14:12



For

8 He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the L-RD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.

Torah observant Jews and Gentiles throw their freedom in Christ away.


Freedom to do what? whatever we feel is right?


My article is not anti-Torah.

Yes it is

Neither was Paul.

Yes he is.

But the Biblical-historical Apostle Paul differs greatly from the fabricated Messianic version of Paul (or Rav Shaul).

True, but the historical paul is also radically different than what you are preaching as well.

The fact is that the apostle Paul never endorsed Torah Observance in the manner which Torah Observant Messianic Jews do today, but rather preached a "Doctrine of Grace".

True, he was not TO, nor did he teach it to Jews, let alone gentiles.

If you are a Gentile Christian that has been seduced into becoming a Messianic Gentile, you probably remember being instructed in your local church about the Doctrine of Grace. If you don't know anything about it and how it stands against obligatory Torah observance, I would be happy to point you to many writings or a grace orientied MJ pastor in your area.

Didn't Paul teach against stealing from another man's congregation?

If you are a Jewish believer in Yeshua, I would like to introduce you to the REAL Gospel, not a false gospel that denys the freedoms given you by the Messiah Himself.

And what do you believe is the REAL gospel?

 

[INTJ-F]

My first reference is: Colossians 2:16 "Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day."

Written to the Romans. IE: Do not let any of the heathen around you judge you because you are now keeping God's dietary laws, observed festivals, new moon celebrations, or His Sabbath day.

My second reference is: 1 Corinthians 10:23-27 "Everything is permissible"--but not everything is beneficial. Everything is permissible--but not everything is constructive. Nobody should seek his own good, but the good of others.

Everything meaning things that are not expressly forbidden by God. IE: smoking, eating chocolate cream pies for breakfast / lunch / dinner, playing donkey kong 24/7 for six months straight, etc. If this was giving permission to do what God said to not do then it was given by a false teacher. It has been widely misinterpreted by heathen to justify their continual sin against God.
​

My third reference in the area of food is: Romans 14:14 "As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean"

FOOD as defined by God. Nowhere is swine or shellfish defined as food. Some people consider all animal products to be unclean and are vegans. Some people consider all animal products except for eggs and dairy to be unclean - they are vegetarians. NOWHERE does this even come close to saying swine and shellfish are not the abominations God said they were in Isaiah 65.

If you accept the New Testament, then you must see that if it seems to contradict the Old Testament then it has been misinterpreted. If Yeshua contradicted the Old Testament - then He was a false messiah. Nowhere does the New Testament contradict the old - the places it seems to do so because they have been misinterpreted in a greco-roman mindset instead of the Hebrew mindset they were originally written for.
​

 

[Lulav]

Seeing how you joined on the 24th of last July and only hung around to promote your beliefs for 5 days (last time on was the 28) I will have to regard this as spam and not await your reply.

 

[visionary]

Seeing how you joined on the 24th of last July and only hung around to promote your beliefs for 5 days (last time on was the 28) I will have to regard this as spam and not await your reply.

mod squad doing their work... not poster's hit and run

 

[Lulav]

You are deceived by thinking that your Torah observance is pleasing to God:

Galatians 3

Faith or Observance of the Law

1You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. 2I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard? 3Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? 4Have you suffered so much for nothing—if it really was for nothing? 5Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?
6Consider Abraham: "He believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." 7Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham. 8The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: "All nations will be blessed through you." 9So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.
10All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." 11Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." 12The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them." 13Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." 14He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

This is meant for you Visionary. The Spirit is speaking to me right now. You will not be as you are now in just a short while. The Spirit of the Lord will change you. I am not saying this on my own!

Hey, Vis, it's been almost a year now, has this 'prophecy' come true yet? Has the 'spirit' told you that your Torah observance is not pleasing to God?