I thought Gentiles were required to keep Torah, for example: When they entered the Abrahamic covenant, they were to be as the native born.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I thought Gentiles were required to keep Torah, for example: When they entered the Abrahamic covenant, they were to be as the native born.No, because the Torah does not require all Gentiles to become circumcised, so they were upholding the Torah by rejecting those who were wanting to make that a requirement. On the other hand, we must obey God rather than man, so if God had commanded in His Torah that all Gentiles to were to become circumcised, but the Jerusalem Council said that they were not to become circumcised, then we should obey God instead of the Jerusalem Council, but that is not what God commanded. The Jerusalem Council had no authority to countermand God, to tell Gentiles not to obey God, or to add to or subtract from God's law (Deuteronomy 4:2), but they only had the authority to to interpret what God's law requires, and that's all they did.
You misunderstand what Christ means when he says that His word belongs to God. Christ is not telling us that hes commanding us to live under OC law. Israel broke Gods covenant and he made anew one, which includes Gentiles as well.
First of all, Messiah does not say anywhere in the Scriptures that we are to not live under Torah. You are confusing "covenant" with Torah. Yes, Torah was apart of the Abrahamic covenant, but since the Isrealites broke the covenant or agreement, Adonai needed to put in in their hearts. So why put it in their hearts? So they will have a will to do it.
Deuteronomy 30:11-16 KJV - "For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But the word (commandment) is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it. See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil; In that I command thee this day to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest live and multiply: and the LORD thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to possess it."
We see here that Torah was meant to be in our hearts so we may do it. When we love Adonai, we will walk in His ways, and keep His commandments.
Second of all, the grafting in of Gentiles was not a new concept. Ruth and Rahab are considered ancestors to Messiah Yeshua. It was even practiced since the Exodus from Egypt.
Exodus 12:38 KJV - "And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle."
Exodus 12:49 KJV - "One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you."
Leviticus 19:34 KJV - "But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God."
Numbers 9:14 KJV - "And if a stranger shall sojourn among you, and will keep the passover unto the LORD; according to the ordinance of the passover, and according to the manner thereof, so shall he do: ye shall have one ordinance, both for the stranger, and for him that was born in the land."
Look at Mathew 5-7, which you cited. You wont see Sabbath mentioned anywhere, nor any dietary laws. Christ actually says that its not what goes in the mouth which defiles but what comes out that defiles, because that comes from mans heart.
I believe you mean Mark 7. The context of Mark 7 has nothing to do with clean vs. unclean foods. Yeshua was not even eating unclean food but he was eating bread.
Mark 7:1-9 KJV - "Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem. And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault. For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders. And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables. Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition."
We see here that the Pharisees had a doctrine for washing hands ritually to make food clean. They found fault with the disciples and deemed them defiled for not washing their hands ritually. Yeshua rebukes the Pharisees and says they layed aside the commands of Adonai. If Yeshua said all meats were clean, why would he defend Torah and rebuke them for rejecting it? Would not that be hypocritical? Some may say he is not reffering to Torah, but this verse is a law from Torah in Ex. 20:12 and Ex. 20:17.
Mark 7:10 KJV - "For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:"
So we see here that the context has nothing to do with clean and unclean foods but washed and unwashed hands.
Mark 7:15 KJV - "There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man."
Therefore, this verse is talking about how we cannot be defiled from food eaten with unwashed hands, remember it is not even talking about clean and unclean foods. This is the same for Mat. 15:11. If it was referring to clean and unclean foods, I could eat human flesh, bat, cat, or dog and it not defile me. Do you think Yeshua was fine with eating human flesh? I think not!
In my recent studies of scripture, i have uncovered a great deal of scripture that teaches about how we use our words. This seems to be a huge part of the meat in the word. I could probably find many more as well. I see this in Isaiah when God says that we should refrain from using our words, from speaking wickedness, i see it in all of Paul writings where he teaches us to put away our wicked speech and speak in love. Its not what goes in our mouth which defiles, but what comes out. This is why Paul says that all things are pure, referring to food.
Mathew 15:11 Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man
Isaiah 58:“If you take away the yoke from your midst,
The pointing of the finger, and speakingwickedness,
Isaiah 58: Nor finding your own pleasure,
Nor speaking your own words,
2 Peter 1:22 “Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth”; 23 who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; 24 who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed. 25 For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
Galtians 5:15 But if you bite and devour one another, beware lest you be consumed by one another!
16 I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary to one another, so that you do not do the things that you wish. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. 24 And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.
1 Co 13:8 Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whetherthere are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.
13 And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
There were two opposing vectors in your comments below. The OP quoted that all of the Law must be kept except those things tied to the Temple and those offerings which Jesus Christ fulfilled.
By the OP's assessment this includes circumcision for Gentile disciples of Jesus Christ.
You gentlemen should find a good mohel with a steady hand.
No, the Jerusalem Council did not countermand what God proclaimed. In fact, the decree that went out invokes the Holy Spirit in their decision:
Acts 15:
24 Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law” —to whom we gave no such commandment— 25 it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. 28 For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29 that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.
Well, if two people agreed on everything, then one of them would be useless. I can see a reason why someone would want to become circumcised after they were justified, but not a requirement.
Indeed, they invoked the Holy Spirit, but not every time that the Holy Spirit is invoked is it also true that the are speaking on His behalf. According to Deuteronomy 13:4-6, even if someone performed signs and wonders, the way that God told them to discern whether someone was a false prophet was by whether they taught against obeying God's commands. The Holy Spirit has the role of leading us in obedience to God's law (Ezekiel 36:26-27), and the Holy Spirit won't ever lead someone away from obedience to God's law, so anyone who invokes the Holy Spirit to lead people away from obeying God's commands is a false prophet and a liar. However, the Jerusalem Council never spoke against Gentiles obeying God's commands.
This is the second thread I've encountered today which alludes to the apostles as false prophets.
I read what you posted above. Am I to conclude the apostles were wrong at the Council of Jerusalem and they led the Gentiles astray? If so who made it 'right' after their error?
I did not mean to allude to the Apostles as false prophets because I don't think any of them were. However, I think certain false interpretation of the Bible make inadvertently make them out to be false prophets by understanding them to be teaching anyone against obeying God's commands, which would be in violation of Deuteronomy 13:4-6 and Deuteronomy 4:2. Some people even go so far as to say Jesus taught against keeping God's dietary laws, which would have made him a false prophet and disqualified him from being the Messiah. Again, I do not think that Jesus ever taught against obeying any of God's commands, so I do not think that he was a false prophet, but those who do teach that Jesus taught against keeping dietary laws do inadvertently make him out to be a false prophet.
It was not the Apostles or the Jerusalem Council that led Gentiles astray, but later misinterpretations of them. If I had to put a date on it, I would say around January 41 AD to January 53 AD, which is when Emperor Claudius expelled the Jews from Rome. Paul wrote his letter to them to address issues that arose upon the return of the Jews and with Gentiles not wanting to come back under Jewish leadership, which they either did not listen to or did not understand.
So as a Gentile is it OK to steal, how about commit adultery? how about kidnapping? should i go on? According to your reasoning it is, unless of course your understanding is wrong and it's more along the lines of what Soyeong said, that this was the starting point for the gentiles not the end.How can one misinterpret the Jerusalem council ruling?
So as a Gentile is it OK to steal, how about commit adultery? how about kidnapping? should i go on? According to your reasoning it is, unless of course your understanding is wrong and it's more along the lines of what Soyeong said, that this was the starting point for the gentiles not the end.
So as a Gentile is it OK to steal, how about commit adultery? how about kidnapping? should i go on? According to your reasoning it is, unless of course your understanding is wrong and it's more along the lines of what Soyeong said, that this was the starting point for the gentiles not the end.
See here is where the problem lies, people want it both ways, first they say that all the gentiles need to do is what is said in Acts 15 and but then they turn around and say things like "Gentile christians had the moral law through Christ and his apostles" If that is true than we have ALL of the teaching as left to us in the new testament to live our live by and not just the Acts 15 example.Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.
Ezekiel 36:26-27 NASB
http://bible.com/100/ezk.36.26-27.NASB
By instruction the Gentile Christians had the moral Law through Christ and His apostles.
Is circumcision required?
This seems to assume that stealing, adultery, and kidnapping are only wrong because God told the Israelites not to do these things. The problem is that these things have always been wrong, not just for Jews, but for everybody.
How can one misinterpret the Jerusalem council ruling?
Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.
Ezekiel 36:26-27 NASB
http://bible.com/100/ezk.36.26-27.NASB
By instruction the Gentile Christians had the moral Law through Christ and His apostles.
Is circumcision required?
Is it wrong? Why because you say so?
Not so, as I proved earlier and you never refuted. Jews who became Christians walked in a mixture of law and grace out of their "zealous of the law".See here is where the problem lies, people want it both ways, first they say that all the gentiles need to do is what is said in Acts 15 and but then they turn around and say things like "Gentile christians had the moral law through Christ and his apostles" If that is true than we have ALL of the teaching as left to us in the new testament to live our live by and not just the Acts 15 example.
For one thing, Christ was still under the law. The New covenant couldn't even start until after he died to fulfil the Old. Did Paul keep them?Also Paul said follow him as he follows Christ (1 Corinth 11:1) Did paul keep the sabbath? did paul keep the feasts? We are to called Christians because we follow Christ, did Christ keep the sabbath? did christ keep the feasts?
See here is where the problem lies, people want it both ways, first they say that all the gentiles need to do is what is said in Acts 15 and but then they turn around and say things like "Gentile christians had the moral law through Christ and his apostles" If that is true than we have ALL of the teaching as left to us in the new testament to live our live by and not just the Acts 15 example.
Also Paul said follow him as he follows Christ (1 Corinth 11:1) Did paul keep the sabbath? did paul keep the feasts? We are to called Christians because we follow Christ, did Christ keep the sabbath? did christ keep the feasts?
It really surprises me how much opposition there is by christians to the Law/Teachings of God (Torah) considering how highly it is regarded by God and the whole old testament. People would rather live by the traditions of men instead of the Torah (instructions of God) There is more to the moral law than just the 10 commandments, and a lot of it is found in the old testament. Some christians choose to glean what ever gems they can from the wisdom left to us in the Torah by God and apply it to there lives, while other christians seem to only call them names (Judaizers) Call the Judaizers for following teachings of Jesus (who was a Jew)
To start with, the issue in Acts 15 was not even about whether to obey God's law in the first place. Jews had a very high opinion of God's law and would never have considered it to be a heavy burden. Throughout the Bible up until the inclusion of Gentiles, there is not a single negative thing that is said about God's law, but rather there is only universally high praise for it. For instance, David sang about how much he delighted in God's law (Psalms 1:1-2) and how much he loved it (Psalms 119:97), and there is other high praise throughout the Psalms, but especially in 19 and 119. Paul said that our faith upholds the law (Romans 3:31), that the law is holy, righteous, and good (Romans 7:12), and that he also delighted in God's law (Romans 7:22), so if we do not keep that in mind at all times, then it can become easy to misinterpret what the NT says about the law. In fact, there are a number of verses that describe the law as being just the opposite of a heavy burden:
Deuteronomy 30:11-16 For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 14 But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it. 15 “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. 16 If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God[a] that I command you today, by loving the Lord your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.
1 John 5:3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome.
Matthew 11:28-30 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”
Jeremiah 6:16-19 Thus says the Lord: “Stand by the roads, and look, and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is; and walk in it, and find rest for your souls. But they said, ‘We will not walk in it.’ 17 I set watchmen over you, saying, ‘Pay attention to the sound of the trumpet!’ But they said, ‘We will not pay attention.’ 18 Therefore hear, O nations, and know, O congregation, what will happen to them. 19 Hear, O earth; behold, I am bringing disaster upon this people, the fruit of their devices, because they have not paid attention to my words; and as for my law, they have rejected it.
God did not give His law to Israel because He thought they could use a heavy burden, but so that they would be a holy and righteous people that He could multiply and bless abundantly. Jesus taught how to follow the law both by word and by giving us a perfect example to follow of how to obey it and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22). When he was calling people to follow him, he was not calling them to behave in some way other than the way that he lived out or the way what God had commanded, but rather he was referencing Jeremiah where God's law is associated with the good way where we will find rest for our souls. Those he referred to being heavy laden where those who were laboring under the teachings of the Pharisees, whom he criticized from trying up heavy loads that they wouldn't lift a finger to move (Matthew 23:4). Jesus also criticized them for setting aside the commands of God in order to follow their traditions (Mark 7:6-13). The Pharisees had mountains of traditions for how to obey God's law, which they traced back to Moses, and some even argued that you couldn't obey the law of Moses without knowing their traditions for how to obey it, so they would not have considered teaching someone to obey the law without also teaching them their traditions. So it was these traditions that were criticized in Acts 15 as being a heavy burden.
Acts 15:1 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”
God only requires circumcision in two instances, so requiring all Gentiles to become circumcised in order to be saved is not according to God, but according to their traditions or customs. So ultimately Acts 15 was not about whether Gentiles should obey God, but rather about whether Gentiles had to obey Jewish traditions for how to obey God's law in order to be saved. It would be difficult to follow God's law without following any traditions, and indeed Paul taught some of his own (1 Corinthians 11:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 2 Thessalonians 3:6), but at no point were these traditions given in order to be saved. We must obey God rather than man, so if the Gentiles had been told by the Jerusalem Council not to obey God's commands, then the Gentiles should have obeyed God and disregarded the Jerusalem Council, but it doesn't come down to that because that is a misunderstanding of what was being said. We should be careful not to mistake something that is against obeying man-made traditions as being against obeying God.
Why then the council?
Acts 15:
And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 Therefore, when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and dispute with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem, to the apostles and elders, about this question.
3 So, being sent on their way by the church, they passed through Phoenicia and Samaria, describing the conversion of the Gentiles; and they caused great joy to all the brethren. 4 And when they had come to Jerusalem, they were received by the church and the apostles and the elders; and they reported all things that God had done with them. 5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, “It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.”
Must men be circumcised to be saved?
Circumcision was mentioned twice above as a requirement for law keeping and salvation.
Indeed His commands are not burdensome. I agree.
1 John 3:
21 Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence toward God. 22 And whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do those things that are pleasing in His sight.
23 And this is His commandment: that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He gave us commandment.
There is no category of moral law found anywhere in the Bible, but rather disobedience to any of God's commands was considered a sin and immoral. In Ezekiel 36:26-27, it is referring to God's law, not some arbitrary moral subset of laws. The Holy Spirit has the role of leading us in obedience to the Law of Moses and will not lead anyone into disobedience to any of God's commands.
The Jerusalem Council was about whether Gentiles had to follow Jewish traditions in order to be saved. At no point does the OT require all Gentiles to be circumcised, and in the cases where it does require Gentiles to do so, it is not for the purpose of being saved. So requiring all Gentiles to be circumcised for the purpose of being saved is a man-made Jewish tradition and not a command of God. We must obey God rather than man, so if that had been a command of God, then we should obey God instead of the Jerusalem Council, but it was not.
They were talking about the Law of Moses not being burdensome, but of being the right way to find rest our souls. Jesus summarized the law as being about how to love God and how to love your neighbor, so if you say we just need to love others so we can ignore all of God's commands for how He wants us to love others, then you are completely missing the point.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?