What exactly is the law?

[bugkiller]

Not according to this Jewish Scholar:

New Testament - My Jewish Learning

It is daunting to think of the number of books a Jew "must" read in order to achieve Jewish literacy. With trepidation I suggest yet another volume to add to that list: the New Testament (NT).

Jews can read the NT to see both the strong Jewish values and the strong anti-Jewish values there. Virtually every page of the NT addresses Judaism either implicitly or explicitly. Jews who want to read a "Jewish book" will find much of interest there.

Excellent point lambster.

bugkiller

 

[squint]

Not according to this Jewish Scholar:

It is daunting to think of the number of books a Jew "must" read in order to achieve Jewish literacy. With trepidation I suggest yet another volume to add to that list: the New Testament (NT).

Jews can read the NT to see both the strong Jewish values and the strong anti-Jewish values there.

That is just pathetic. Just pathetic.

Come out of the dark ages lloJ

s

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

That is just pathetic. Just pathetic.

Come out of the dark ages lloJ

s

Careful bro. I would hate to have to dust off my "report" button.
I am thru dialoging with you.




..

 

[squint]

Careful bro. I would hate to have to dust off my "report" button.
I am thru dialoging with you.

Even the Pope has apologized for the RCC's anti-semetic stance lloJ.

That sight is NOT a requirement of christianity in any form.

s

 

[Gxg (G²)]

It seems to me there is some dispute what the law is. Does "the" word have a specific or limiting meaning to a word following it?

If I may share..

The ministry known as Hebrew for Christians is one of the best resources available on the issue which may help you on your question:

• Hebrew for Christians Role of Torah Articles
• Bible Study: The Book of Hebrews (Menu) - CRI/Voice, Institute

Hebrews 7-10 give a lot of further detail on the issue, as it concerns changes in the Law - Christ coming through Judah rather than Levi predominately, the sacrifical system being completed and other things - all against the background of Jewish believers being severely persecuted for not doing things the way that the rest of Judaism suscribed to with the Mosaic as they understood it - and the believer being told that they truly had a BETTER covenant Imagine your father giving you a tricycle when you're a kid...and later, when in high school, he gives you a multi-speed bicycle. And when you reach junior year in college, he gives you a car.

When he gave the tricycle it was not bad. ..for it was great. But, if he gave that same tricycle when you were a junior in college, it wouldn't have been so great. God gave the Mosaic covenant to the Jewish people at Mt. Sinai and it was very very good. Likewise, God offered the New Covenant thru His Son and it is a better covenant. Just as the tricycle was very very good, but in college, the car was better. God doesn't change. But we do.

And under the New Covenant, we change significantly.

Yeshua fulfilled the Law in order to make room for New Law to be initiated, honoring the OT in what it pointed to while taking others to Himself (As the Destination) and leading them into something beautiful....like driving an old car that has much value since it helps with many things (i.e. transportation primarily) and yet getting out of that one in order to walk into another NEW Car that has much of the same schematics as an older program except new parts are included that allow one to go much further than what the Older Car enabled them to do.


I've always tended to see the Law of Moses through the eyes of Christ in the same way one would see the laws of the U.S if going to D.C. For there've been many developments within our nation's history.....and some things that've progressed. Whereas some things that changed NEEDED to do so due to their not being just (as with laws concerning slavery, for popular example), not all things that changed were a sign of something negative occurring previously. For something progressing doesn't mean what used to occur before is somehow bad. To say such would be no more logical than saying that the artwork or artifacts in a Museum such as Smithsonian National Musuem in Washington D.C are somehow "bad" because we don't use them as often anymore. They retain their status of "good" and are still appreciated as the foundation for other developments---but they are not what we still seek to operate in.

It's the same way with other things in life that others experience....and it can alter. For just as a change from something before doesn't mean that it was "bad" in the past, something being good from the past doesn't mean that it is automatically good in the present or that its always applicable to every setting. I'm reminded of curfews...as a 7:00pm curfew being beneficial for children at a certain age doesn't mean that it stops being considered as "good" when more freedoms are given for the children as they grow older.

Some things remain constant, such as the fact that being responsible (the purpose behind curfew) and learning boundaries....even though a child looks back acknowleding the previous curfew was beneficial/can be learned from while the new/extended freedoms are ALSO good. But if the child is required to walk in the same way as they were when they were truly a child, then it'd be destructive---and you'd end up having grown up children in the house who are not able to function on their own even when they're being told by the parents to be "adults" while still being placed under things which were given for a season.

I'm reminded of what occurred with the religious leaders trying to trap Jesus by discussing the laws of Moses in regards to divorce ( Deuteronomy 24:2-4)---as they were focused on what Moses gave in the law and the Lord brought them back to the focus of how things were MEANT to be....and why laws were given ( Matthew 19:7-9 , Mark 10:4-6/) Where they had actually glorifed one aspect of what Moses said, the Lord made clear that a specific law was never given because the Lord wanted others to walk in that for all time...but rather, it was given since the people were corrupt/wouldn't honor him and a system had to be given to restrain the damage that could be done to others when marriage wasn't upheld.

The same thing goes for laws made about polygamy, as the Law stated that a man could take another wife as long as he still provided for his first wife (Exo.21:10). And for others who had multiple wives:

• Jacob married Leah and Rachel (Gen.29:23-30; 31:17; 32:22) and then he married Leah and Rachel's handmaids, Zilbah and Bilhahand (Genesis 30:1-24; 37:2)
• Judge Gideon had many wives and a concubine (Judges 8:30-31)
• Elkanah married Hannah and Peninnah (1 Sam.1:2)
• David married Abigail and Ahinoam (1 Sam.25:42-43; 30:18), then later took more wives (2 Sam.5:13) at Jerusalem (1 Chron.14:3)
• In 2 Sam.12:7-8, God gave David these multiple wives as a blessing, just as anointing him as king over Israel, protecting him from Saul, and giving him the house of Israel and Judah were also blessings from Him
• Ashur married Helah and Naarah (1 Chron.4:5)
• Shaharaim married Hushim and Baara (1 Chron.8:8)
• Abijah had 14 wives (2 Chron.13:21)
• Jehoiada the priest had 2 wives (2 Chron.24:3).

Many other examples besides that....but it is not necessarily the case that polygamay was something that ALL were to assume they were to support simply because Moses said something about it in the law---as the Lord Jesus again made clear that God's original intention was for ONE man and ONE Woman to become one.

Matthew 13:52

He said to them, "Therefore every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old."
​

Not even the disciples were to spurn the old for the sake of the new....as they were instead to realize that the new insights they gleaned from Jesus' parables were to be understood in light of the old truths/vice versa. For anyone who understands God's real purpose in the law as revealed in the OT has a real treasure..and the OT Points the way to Jesus the Messiah. Jesus always upheld its authority and relevance. But there is a double benefit to those who understand Jesus teaching about the Kingdom of Heaven. For this was a new treasure that Jesus was revealing. Both the old and new teaching give practical guidelines for faith and for living in the world. The religious leaders, however, were trapped in the old and blind to the new.

With Matthew 13:52, of course the text deals primarily with those who are teachers for the Kingdom of God---but anyone with a BASIC understanding of the Judaic System/Culture realizes that the teachers of the laws/scribes were often apart of the ones leading the way in the Kingdom of God...as it was their role in the communities to know the law.. One can consider the examples of others such as Ezra in Nehemiah 8:1-3 ..as well as Nehemiah 13:12-14 /Nehemiah 8. For the scribes were those who were well-studied in law/Torah.....and were also connected with those who were Pharisees, just as it is with others who were lawyers connected with them too ( Luke 7:29-31 / Luke 10:24-26 /Luke 11:44-46 /Luke 14:2-4).


Some of this goes in line with what Luke 24:13-36, the issue of the NT giving light to the old is something that can be seen even in Jesus when he noted that all of the Law/Prophets were meant to be POINTERS---DIRECTING traffic to the person of Christ who was to come.....the one whom John 1:17 notes, "Through Moses came the Law; Grace and Truth came through Christ."

Understanding this makes a world of difference when it comes to the reality of how OT principles still have much purpose in training/teaching us today about the Lord.

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.
​

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.

The commandments Jesus was referring to in Matthew 5 are all the commands in the OT (although many will be applied differently once their purpose has been fulfilled in CHrist). The rabbis recognized the difference/distinction between "light" commands (such as tithing garden produce) and "Weighty" commands (such as those concerning idolatry, murder, etc). And Jesus demands both a commitment to both the least and the greatest commandments yet condemns those who confuse the two--in Matthew 23:23-24. The entire OT is an expression of God's Will....but is now to be taught according to Jesus's interpretation of its intent and meaning.

Luke 16:16-17
Additional Teachings
16"The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it. 17It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.
​

The Law of the Prophets is the old covenant age, now superceded by the Kingdom of God.....and of course, the OT moral law still has validity as the WORD of God---as those laws will never become void since they reflect the very person and character of God, who will never pass away.

In the event that what I've said/taken time to share isn't clear enough, as one prominent Messianic Jewish synagouge (Congregation Shema Yisrael) :

• The covenant upon which much of the Torah is based is a broken covenant (there is no Temple and therefore no sacrifices by which we may draw near to God and obtain eternal life). It is impossible to keep all the laws of the Mosaic Covenant today. In addition, most Jews live outside of Israel, and many of the laws only apply to life within Israel.

• The laws that are part of the covenant mediated by Moses are still extremely valuable and relevant. The Torah continues to inform and guide the life of the Jewish people. It teaches us the right things to do and gives us a good way to live. It helps us live an authentic Jewish lifestyle. It helps us remain part of the Holy People. The issue of assimilation is a major problem for Messianic Jews. Historically, Messianic Jewish families that make no effort to live a Jewish lifestyle or to be involved in Jewish evangelism will almost always assimilate and lose their Jewish identity within a couple of generations. The issue of assimilation is something that is addressed in the New Testament. Rabbi Paul commands Messianic Jews to not become uncircumcised (1 Corinthians 7:18), which means not to seek assimilation into the prevailing Gentile culture, but to continue their Jewish way of life.

• The Torah is more than the Mosaic Covenant. All of the Word of God, including the New Covenant, is “Torah” (literally, “teaching” or “instruction”).

• The early Messianic Jews had a favorable view of the Torah, and many were zealous to live in accordance with it (see Acts 21:20 26). History documents that Messianic Jews continued to live a distinctly Jewish, Torah based lifestyle for centuries after the arrival of Messiah Yeshua. There is no incompatibility with being “zealous for the Torah” and being a Messianic Jew.

Therefore: I am pro Torah, while recognizing that the Covenant made at Sinai is a broken covenant. I am pro-Torah, valuing the great wisdom that is found in the Torah. I am pro Torah, recognizing that all Believers are in some sense to fulfill the Law (Romans 8:4), but that not all of us are obligated to fulfill the same requirements of the Law (for example, Gentiles need not be circumcised).
​

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by squint Why would they? To pick up our substitutes? Which ones? Take yer pick of multiple thousands of alternatives.

In many ways they are much better off NOT to. After all even we consider that we are worshipping and dealing with the same God. There is no question in my mind that is the case.

Not according to this Jewish Scholar:

New Testament - My Jewish Learning

It is daunting to think of the number of books a Jew "must" read in order to achieve Jewish literacy. With trepidation I suggest yet another volume to add to that list: the New Testament (NT).

Jews can read the NT to see both the strong Jewish values and the strong anti-Jewish values there. Virtually every page of the NT addresses Judaism either implicitly or explicitly. Jews who want to read a "Jewish book" will find much of interest there.

Excellent point lambster.

bugkiller

Thanks.
Don't know why it ruffled the feathers of this particular member tho

Originally Posted by squint That is just pathetic. Just pathetic.

Come out of the dark ages lloJ

s

 

[squint]

Thanks.
Don't know why it ruffled the feathers of this particular member tho

I'm only surprised that people still think that way.

 

[fhansen]

What is the purpose of the law?

bugkiller

Would you answer that question for me? And does the law at all reflect the will of God for man?

 

[squint]

The TWO Covenants and The Law are intimately linked.

The TWO Covenants exist in the first TWO dictates of God to Adam.

God never changed His Discourses on these matters from there.

They got progressively elaborate until Gods Word Himself became FLESH.

Then The Two Covenants were ALIVE and LIVING with men in His flesh.

The Law condemned sin in the flesh. Jesus did exactly no differently.

Romans 8:3
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

The Law itself could not 'do this' because the LAW itself was given to flesh that HAD SIN. That is why ALL FLESH prior to Christ could NOT condemn sin to the fullest extent because the carriers themselves HAD IT.

and still do.

s

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by bugkiller

Excellent point lambster.

bugkiller

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus Thanks.

Don't know why it ruffled the feathers of this particular member tho

Originally Posted by squint That is just pathetic. Just pathetic.

Come out of the dark ages lloJ

I'm only surprised that people still think that way.

Since you responded to my post, I have to ask what you mean by "still think that way".

What way is that?



.

 

[squint]

Since you responded to my post, I have to ask what you mean by "still think that way".

What way is that?
.

There has been abundant critique put to the view you espouse lloJ. And you obviously were unable to hear any of it. I bolded your sight on this matter prior and said what it is for what it is. And you apparently don't see that either.

Pity. Nothing personal.

s

 

[toLiJC]

I did not use the large blue letters in my title because I think they all appear in black and same text size.

It seems to me there is some dispute what the law is. Does "the" word have a specific or limiting meaning to a word following it? Is the law the all inclusive law of God? In this case are the grammer rules of English and Greek different? I wish to have demonstrated through text what the truth is.

bugkiller

the true Word is that which comes direct from the true God and Jesus, while the biblical scripture is their written word which is recorded in special terms/names completely plain only to certain elected

Blessings

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus

Since you responded to my post, I have to ask what you mean by "still think that way".

What way is that?

​

There has been abundant critique put to the view you espouse lloJ. And you obviously were unable to hear any of it. I bolded your sight on this matter prior and said what it is for what it is. And you apparently don't see that either.

Pity. Nothing personal.

s

That still doesn't answer the question I asked you. Your being evasive.



.

 

[squint]

That still doesn't answer the question I asked you. Your being evasive.
.

I don't think I could have been more plain.

 

[Frogster]

That is just pathetic. Just pathetic.

Come out of the dark ages lloJ

s

lloj is right, gentiles were called the dogs, the uncircumcision, the foreskin, the foolish.

so paul called the jews flesh mutilators in phil 3, and shook off the dust in acts 18, and 13, Paul, peter, stephen blamed the jews too, for the cross.

the jews are storing up wrath for themsleves, rom 2:5.

so lets not act like there were not hostilites, and it was all because of the law.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus

That still doesn't answer the question I asked you. Your being evasive.

​

I don't think I could have been more plain.

You have been anything but plain about it. Be more explicit.




.

 

[squint]

lloj is right, gentiles were called the dogs, the uncircumcision, the foreskin, the foolish.

The only obvious part of that statement is that you are a very poor allegorical student and prefer to see The Word in largely fleshly manner.

But we discovered that quite long ago didn't we?

 

[Frogster]

The only obvious part of that statement is that you are a very poor allegorical student and prefer to see The Word in largely fleshly manner.

But we discovered that quite long ago didn't we?

refute my post.

 

[squint]

refute my post.

Are gentiles dogs?

bow wow

 

[Frogster]

Are gentiles dogs?

bow wow

humor is not a refute, by a deflective diversion from the frog!

alrighty now..luv ya, be back later, and lloj is da man!