RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Christian Doctrine



Message


LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 10:54:39 AM)

quote:

The "You have heard it said that you shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy..." was a Torah teaching. Question where is this found in the Torah? I'm still looking for it, Bob97 or anyone...do you know where this Scripture is found?

quote:

LBolt you really need to study your Torah very very close. Because in Leviticus 19:17-18. It sates And my I say it states that "Do not hate your brother in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so that you will not share in his guilt.
Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself.

But As read further Lapithod has put it up. So what can I write but it is in the scriptures that what Christ was talking about in the sermon on the mount.


I think you misunderstood me...my question was where does it encourage us to "love our neighbor and hate our enemy?" I am well aware of that text, thanks, however it does not teach us to hate our enemy. Yahshua said you have heard it said...He was talking how others have said...but then provides what Torah actually teaches. It was taught by some to love neighbor and hate enemies but this was not His doctrine or Torah. You see where I am coming from?




Lapidoth -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 11:21:52 AM)

Makes sense to me.




mcleod -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 11:58:12 AM)

Lbolt,

quote:

I think you misunderstood me...my question was where does it encourage us to "love our neighbor and hate our enemy?" I am well aware of that text, thanks, however it does not teach us to hate our enemy. Yahshua said you have heard it said...He was talking how others have said...but then provides what Torah actually teaches. It was taught by some to love neighbor and hate enemies but this was not His doctrine or Torah. You see where I am coming from?


Yes I see where you are coming from on that okay I was wrong to jump to a conclusion without asking you to clarify your statement. I am sorry.
Remember the story where a teacher of the law came to Jesus and ask the question "How can I have eternal life". Jesus came back to him with a question. "What does the law state"? The teacher said " To love the Lord your God with all of your heart and your neighbor as yourself". then Jesus goes and tells a story about a Samartian that does good to someone. After the story Jesus ask the question;" Which one of these three was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?
Notice that the teacher of the law knew the answer but could not say the name of the individual. Because of the great hatered he and most of the jews had for those people.




bob97 -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 12:49:16 PM)

LBolt…you can’t find this in scripture because it doesn’t exist. I suspect that this was a Hebrew interpretation of scripture.

Jesus raised this commandment dramatically. He said, Mt 5:43 “You have heard that it was said, ’You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’” The Hebrew Scriptures accepted hating the enemies of God. Ps 139:21 “Do I not hate them that hate Thee, O Lord? And do I not loathe them that rise up against Thee? I hate them with perfect hatred.” He changed Lv 19:18 “love your neighbor” to Mt 5:44 “Love your enemies,” expanding the range of our love from the neighborhood to the world. God loves all His covenant family; the most miserable refugee remains God’s image and likeness. Jesus told us, Mt 25:40 “As you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.” The “coveting” commandments, Ex 20:17 prohibiting near occasions of sin, prefigured our Lord’s raising several “love one another” commandments to new heights. The fifth commandment, Ex 20:13 “You shall not kill,” became, Mt 5:22 “Every one who is angry … shall be liable to judgment.” The sixth, Ex 20:14 “You shall not commit adultery,” became, Mt 5:28 “Every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” The eighth, Ex 20:16 “You shall not bear false witness,” became, Mt 5:34 “Do not swear at all … Let what you say be simply ’Yes’ or ’No.’”

Really Lv 19;18 says it all about how we should treat our neighbors..

Bob




LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 1:34:26 PM)

Also realize that Psalms records the records of human feelings and passions not necessarily doctrine in every respects. Like Ecclesiates. Yahshua was employing a common teaching style "You have heard it said...but I say unto you... This was common for the sages of their day. They would say, Rabbi Akiva said..., and Rabbi So and So said this...

Messiah dealt with the heart of the matter which is what it has always been about. Oh that there was such a heart in them... Deut 5:29?? I think that's where it found. Incidently, Lev. 19 is widely considered the heart of Torah.

quote:

LBolt…you can’t find this in scripture because it doesn’t exist. I suspect that this was a Hebrew interpretation of scripture.


Exactdamundo!! [:D]

My point was that Yahshua never changed the Torah, He properly interpreted it and taught it. This is the whole point of Him saying what He's says in John 5:45-47. This is why I do not understand why we say Torah is invalid, abolished, antiquated, fulfilled therefore done away with, old, etc, etc, etc... You can't understand the words of Messiah properly without it nor the words of the writers of the Brit Chadasha.




bob97 -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 2:03:08 PM)

LBolt...what about sacrifice for sin...hasn't that changed after the cross?[:)]

Bob




Lapidoth -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 2:08:13 PM)

quote:

This was common for the sages of their day. They would say, Rabbi Akiva said..., and Rabbi So and So said this...


Reminds me of the school in "Yentl"

always arguing, oiy




LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 2:10:00 PM)

I think this has been established already...I do find it interesting that after the resurrection in Acts, Paul offers the Nazarite vow offering...They kept Sabbath and the were scene celebrating the Feasts. Interesting indeed!

Ezekiel's Temple will have a future fulfillment someday and... I did notice some sort of sacrifice. How do we reconcile this? Do we allegorize this to refer to our bodies being the Temple...what do you think?




Lapidoth -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 2:20:12 PM)

Many do allegorize it, but I take it for what it says.

During the Millennium we will once again keep the Sabbath,
observe the Feasts of YHWH, and there will be sacrifices.
For the sacrifices, we have to be able to look beyond our
RT traditions. The one missing will be the "atonement"
sacrifice since it was a "once and for all" offering by Yeshua.
There will have to be a Temple for all that to transpire.




bob97 -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 2:38:09 PM)

That answer is beyond my pay grade.[:D]

Bob




Odeliya -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 3:17:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lapidoth

Many do allegorize it, but I take it for what it says.

During the Millennium we will once again keep the Sabbath,
observe the Feasts of YHWH, and there will be sacrifices.
For the sacrifices, we have to be able to look beyond our
RT traditions. The one missing will be the "atonement"
sacrifice since it was a "once and for all" offering by Yeshua.
There will have to be a Temple for all that to transpire.


i say -lets start practicing now, so we are ready whne time comes. We can designate some portable, study size Temple in the meantime.

whispering see that cute bird right above me..Lets grab him, we can use him for dry run!




Lapidoth -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 4:45:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bob97

That answer is beyond my pay grade.[:D]

Bob


For me that would be disastrous as I don't get paid. LOL.




LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 4:50:35 PM)

quote:

i say -lets start practicing now, so we are ready whne time comes. We can designate some portable, study size Temple in the meantime
.

Sweetheart, if you want to offer a bird up... go right ahead!! LOL! I'll watch or read your post about it! LOL!




bjay0801 -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 6:19:10 PM)

Some of the orthodox Jews are practicing sacrifices, I think. Just so they can remember how it's done. But I'm not 100% sure of that.




chadinho -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 8:12:51 PM)

I think a good question would be why "wouldn't" we want to be observant of God's Torah/Law? If God made it than it's obviously good like everything else he made. Jesus and all the apostles and leaders of the early church were Torah observant. If Jesus was Torah observant and our goal is to imitate him, shouldn't we be mindful of it as well? Of course I'm not saying we're gonna score any extra salvation points for it or anything like that, I'm just saying that if our God and savior loves it shouldn't we?




LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 9:20:59 PM)

Amen, Chadinho and welcome to Crosswalk. I hope you have you helmet and body armor because things tend to get heated! LOL!

It hard for our brothers to see the benefits of Torah because tradition. Good to hear from you.




SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 11:39:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: chadinho

I think a good question would be why "wouldn't" we want to be observant of God's Torah/Law? If God made it than it's obviously good like everything else he made. Jesus and all the apostles and leaders of the early church were Torah observant. If Jesus was Torah observant and our goal is to imitate him, shouldn't we be mindful of it as well? Of course I'm not saying we're gonna score any extra salvation points for it or anything like that, I'm just saying that if our God and savior loves it shouldn't we?

Some things in Torah simply aren't required anymore, while others have served their purpose in helping us understand the true intentions God wanted to communicate to us. Like the clean/ unclean requirements of Lev. 15. Do you keep them to the letter? Or are you like many of us in the non-literal Torah camp and have gleaned the principles those requirements represented and believe we are now released from the letter of those laws?

It's ironic how observance of the letter of the law can often be it's own worst enemy in communicating the real purposes and intentions of God. There are probably many people, for instance, who are faultless in regard to going to church and not doing any work in the designated time slot designated by the law of 6pm Friday to 6pm Saturday yet who have not bridled their tongues and have in effect made their 'religion' worthless, and are totally oblivious to God's displeasure, but who take false comfort in their religious activities.




chadinho -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/5/2008 11:43:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LBolt

It hard for our brothers to see the benefits of Torah because tradition. Good to hear from you.


Yeah, I think it's because we translate "Torah" as "Law" so all people see when they look at it is a bunch of rules when it really is much more than that. It also doesn't help that over the centuries our understanding of what legalism is got a bit fuzzy so whenever a person even mentions being observant of Torah they are automatically seen as being legalistic when its not always the case. Anti-semitism probably had a part in it too.

1 Timothy 1:8
"We know that the Torah is good, provided one uses it in the way the Torah itself intends."


I'm probably gonna get blasted by somebody on this one, but oh well, it is a discussion after all. lol




Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/6/2008 12:07:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Odeliya

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lapidoth

Many do allegorize it, but I take it for what it says.

During the Millennium we will once again keep the Sabbath,
observe the Feasts of YHWH, and there will be sacrifices.
For the sacrifices, we have to be able to look beyond our
RT traditions. The one missing will be the "atonement"
sacrifice since it was a "once and for all" offering by Yeshua.
There will have to be a Temple for all that to transpire.


i say -lets start practicing now, so we are ready whne time comes. We can designate some portable, study size Temple in the meantime.

whispering see that cute bird right above me..Lets grab him, we can use him for dry run!


Kosher butchers have been "practicing" for ages. The procedures are not dictated by Ha Torah, but have been left to the Cohans to work out. Maybe they have had special revelation. I don't know. I do know they have done their best to make it as quick and painless as possible.

Now as for actual practicing, I do not think that is appropiate since it would be gratuitious and not valuable as an appropriate reminder outside of the appointed setting. Also, there is some debate regarding whether the Cohans will assist with sacrifice or the firstborn or head of each household will perform the act.

As I see the purpose of the Yom Kippur or Pesach sacrifices, there is no problem with them continuing in Yeshua's Temple. That is because I believe they have never been for the purpose of salvation, but have always been for illustrative purposes. One justification for this is the exceptional sacrifice of Manoah, the father of Sampson.

Judges 13:19 Then Manoah took a young goat, together with the grain offering, and sacrificed it on a rock to the Lord. And the Lord did an amazing thing while Manoah and his wife watched: 20 As the flame blazed up from the altar toward heaven, the angel of the Lord ascended in the flame. Seeing this, Manoah and his wife fell with their faces to the ground.

Some believe "the angel of the Lord" is an incarnation of Adonai, ie Yeshua(Jesus), since it was necessary for Adonai to directly command any sacrifice that was not in the Tabernacle or the Temple. Now, there are a lot of presumptions here, so I would not be argumentative about any of them. Such is the difficulty in trying to determine what some would call the "hard and fast" directives of Ha Torah. In short, Ha Torah is not as detailed and laden with tedious procedures as some believe it is. Thus, as I have said before, the hardest part of Ha Torah is with what it does not say, not what it does say.




chadinho -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/6/2008 12:12:32 AM)

Spongeblog,

Yes I agree that some of the commandments are no longer necessary and in fact, some of them don't even apply to non Jewish people, and no I'm not saying we absolutely have to follow anything to the letter in order to please God. I just feel that sometimes our view of Torah is a bit on the negative side as we (Christians) tend to get a little defensive or offended whenever the subject is brought up. Jesus came to fulfill Torah and I believe ultimately is the goal of Torah, I just wish we could see it for the good thing that it is and not some burden to be avoided.

BTW, don't think I'm like super Torah observant guy or anything because I'm not. I do love the sabbath as well the biblical feasts, but I'm not trying to start a new movement or judge anybody by it or anything like that. It's just a personal thing that helps me understand my relationship with God better.




Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/6/2008 1:37:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
...Maybe that's because of how you define character or maybe I should say don't define chartacter.

I have repeatedly said the fruit of the Spirit, or the fruit of righteousness, is what defines godly character. I am at a loss as to how you do not see these as qualities of a person's character.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
...Of course, understanding who Adonai is and having an ongoing relationship with Him is more important than anything in particular I might do in that relationship, including circumcision.

I know you understand that. But how does one know they have that relationship? I've been trying to show you what 'knowing' God means according to Jeremiah and hence what is written on our hearts by the Holy Spirit in the New Covenant.
Emphasis mine.

This has been my question to you all along. You say only the lists in Pauls letters give us a clue. I say Pauls lists expound upon Ha Torah giving us an even clearer view of that relationship.


quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
...This is also has been a problem in our conversation. You claim to be "sealed with the Holy Spirit and 'know' the heart and mind of God" and therefore insist that any interpretation of a particular passage that is not in agreement with yours is "ridiculous". I on the other hand, if my memory is correct, only state that I do not agree and provide alternate interpretations.

Don't take it personally. But I am firmly convinced it is ridiculous to think what day you go to Church on (for instance) is more important than what you do with the rest of your life. Paul explains this using circumcision as the example. Paul says even the person who is uncircumcised and yet obeys the moral laws of behavior will condemn the person who is circumcised but doesn't obey those other laws. Externals count for nothing. That's why I say it's ridiculous to believe those externals are the epitome of what it means to obey God. Many people in many denominations have their opinions of what epitomizes being a Christian. The Bible says being a new creation as defined by the fruit of the Spirit is what epitomizes the Christian experience. Nothing else matters. Offer them up as freewill offerings if you want, but they count for nothing in regard to the requirements of God.


I do not believe the fruits and gifts are a complete list, but Paul uses these lists as examples of the characeristics of the Torah observant lifestyle. Yes, even these are as resounding gong or a clanging cymbal without love. However, the lists, whether they be in Ha Torah or Paul's letters give us a view of what love is as through a darkened glass. Many of these things will pass away when we see Adonai face to face, but that had not happened when Paul wrote His letters and I am not sure it has happened yet.


quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
...you set up a dichotomy. As if one's cup must be clean either on the inside or the outside and not both. Of course, one could have a discussion on what constitutes clean, but we are never able to get here because we can not get beyond this dichotomy.

Paul is the one who defends this dichotomy of inside and outside. He said outside things like circumcision are a big fat nothing. He says it's what's inside that counts. Many, many people have their pet 'outward' cleansing procedure that they think matters to God above and beyond what's inside. Many of these people don't even know about the inner cleansing. And how that inner cleansing looks on the outside because, as we know, Jesus said if you clean the inside of the cup, the outside will be clean. I'm arguing for what the outside truly looks like when the inside has been cleaned. And it ain't going to church on Saturday's, or adhering to the OT schedule of Feasts, etc. Godly character is the cleaned up look that we see on the outside of a person who's been cleaned up on the inside, and that ultimately proves they have indeed been cleaned up inside. There are many who are deceived into thinking various external worship techniques are how you prove you've been made clean inside. And in that thinking, many neglect the true measure of the new nature inside. Usually because they don't even know about it, having been indoctrinated in the externals instead of what really counts. This sad fact cuts all across Christendom, not just the literal Torah camp.


I do not believe Paul sees a dichotomy between the internal and the external, but between the Spirit of Adonai and the Spirit of Sin. Your continual returning to terms like "proves", "indoctrinated" and "hard and fast". Nothing we do "proves" anything and just because one chooses to do something does not mean they have been "indoctrinated" or that they are interpreting things in a "hard and fast" manner. When I use the steering wheel to direct my car, I am not proving I can drive the car nor am I indoctrinated that one can only guide ones car with a steering wheel and I do not feel I always must keep both hands on the wheel at 10 and 2. Keeping a firm hand on the steering wheel just makes it easier to keep the car between the lines. Yes, I do not have to stay between the lines, but the people who designed the car and the road assure me that my trip will go better if I do. In the same way if I diligently study Ha Torah, that is Yeshua because the written Torah speaks of Him, and Paul's clarification of it(Him), then Adonai has told me the trip will go much better than if I don't.

quote:

In the New Covenant we are guided more by principles than hard and fast rules, though we certainly have those.

And circumcision and Sabbath keeping were the 'sign' commandments in the old covenant. But even the OT helps us understand that circumcision is really circumcision of the heart. IOW, the true sign of being in covenant with God is not circumcision of the penis, it's circumcision of the heart.


As you just said, this is also how was under what you call the OT. Repeatedly, the prophets tell us that the blood of bulls and goats are not what Adonai is looking for, but a humble and contrite heart.

quote:

It seems to be directly opposed to what God said, but putting to death the sin nature through the circumcision of the Spirit still qualifies as being 'marked' in the flesh seeing as how a godly person is missing the deeds of the flesh.


Here is where you err. Circumcision of the heart does not qualify as being 'marked' in the flesh. Circumcision of the heart is the true sign of the covenant and always has been. Also, flesh and physical are not interchangable terms. Not all physical deeds are fleshly as Yeshua and Paul use the term. The term flesh, it appears to me, is the unguided animal instincts and the desires of self agrandizement and preservation. That is why Yeshua exemplifies the greatest gift, love, by saying greater love has no man than to give his life for his friends. Now giving ones life is a physical act and could be a selfish act. But it need not be and if we do it for the right reasons we become a sweet savor to Adonai. Yeshua and Paul used many more examples of physical acts to guide us into all the truth. If we study, understand and follow those examples we will be blessed. Ha Torah, as clarified and exemplified by Yeshua, is the same. When we study, understand and follow Ha Torah, as clarified and exemplified by Yeshua, we will also be blessed.




SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/6/2008 10:18:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
...Of course, understanding who Adonai is and having an ongoing relationship with Him is more important than anything in particular I might do in that relationship, including circumcision.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog
I know you understand that. But how does one know they have that relationship? I've been trying to show you what 'knowing' God means according to Jeremiah and hence what is written on our hearts by the Holy Spirit in the New Covenant.


This has been my question to you all along. You say only the lists in Pauls letters give us a clue. I say Pauls lists expound upon Ha Torah giving us an even clearer view of that relationship.

Wrong! Torah teaches that circumcision is one of the required signs of the relationship between God and his people. Paul excludes circumcision as a requirement and sign of being in covenant with, and belonging to God, even saying it counts for 'nothing'. This is the very example I'm using to prove to you that you cannot claim that the new covenant is simply expounding on, or adding to the requirements of Torah. It changes them.





quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
I do not believe Paul sees a dichotomy between the internal and the external, but between the Spirit of Adonai and the Spirit of Sin.

Circumcision is outward. Being a new creation is inward. Paul says outward circumcision is meaningless, but says being a new creation is everything. How is this not a dichotomy?





quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:

...circumcision and Sabbath keeping were the 'sign' commandments in the old covenant. But even the OT helps us understand that circumcision is really circumcision of the heart. IOW, the true sign of being in covenant with God is not circumcision of the penis, it's circumcision of the heart.


As you just said, this is also how was under what you call the OT. Repeatedly, the prophets tell us that the blood of bulls and goats are not what Adonai is looking for, but a humble and contrite heart.

We both know that, but God never told the Israelites to exclude them, but rather make them right and acceptable. Contrast that with the NT which excludes them altogether.




Bluethread -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/8/2008 7:52:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpongeBlog

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
You say only the lists in Pauls letters give us a clue. I say Pauls lists expound upon Ha Torah giving us an even clearer view of that relationship.

Wrong! Torah teaches that circumcision is one of the required signs of the relationship between God and his people. Paul excludes circumcision as a requirement and sign of being in covenant with, and belonging to God, even saying it counts for 'nothing'. This is the very example I'm using to prove to you that you cannot claim that the new covenant is simply expounding on, or adding to the requirements of Torah. It changes them.


I know it is your opinion that circumcission was necessary for salvation. However, as I have stated before, I believe that circumcission has never been necessary for salvation and that is what Paul is refering to when he says circumcission is "nothing". It is nothing in regard to salvation.






quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
I do not believe Paul sees a dichotomy between the internal and the external, but between the Spirit of Adonai and the Spirit of Sin.

Circumcision is outward. Being a new creation is inward. Paul says outward circumcision is meaningless, but says being a new creation is everything. How is this not a dichotomy?


I explained this in the last paragragh of my last post, to which you chose not to respond.





quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Repeatedly, the prophets tell us that the blood of bulls and goats are not what Adonai is looking for, but a humble and contrite heart.

We both know that, but God never told the Israelites to exclude them, but rather make them right and acceptable. Contrast that with the NT which excludes them altogether.


As I stated before, the sacrifices are not excluded but made impossible to practice until the rebuilding of the Temple.

Since you chose not to respond to my restatement of my explanation of the relationship between the Spirit and what Yeshua and Paul refer to as "the flesh" I will repost it here.

Here is where you err. Circumcision of the heart does not qualify as being 'marked' in the flesh. Circumcision of the heart is the true sign of the covenant and always has been. Also, flesh and physical are not interchangable terms. Not all physical deeds are fleshly as Yeshua and Paul use the term. The term flesh, it appears to me, is the unguided animal instincts and the desires of self agrandizement and preservation. That is why Yeshua exemplifies the greatest gift, love, by saying greater love has no man than to give his life for his friends. Now giving ones life is a physical act and could be a selfish act. But it need not be and if we do it for the right reasons we become a sweet savor to Adonai. Yeshua and Paul used many more examples of physical acts to guide us into all the truth. If we study, understand and follow those examples we will be blessed. Ha Torah, as clarified and exemplified by Yeshua, is the same. When we study, understand and follow Ha Torah, as clarified and exemplified by Yeshua, we will also be blessed.




LBolt -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/8/2008 10:53:42 PM)

If I may slip this in...Avraham was saved 24 years before circumcision. He heard the voice of God, started on his faith journey, stumbles on the way, received awesome promises from God...all before circumcision. Avram was saved the moment he trusted God. Therefore circumcision in and od itself does not, can not and will not saved. Period.

Water baptism is a outward sign of an inner witness of one's allegience to Messiah. It is a command. You are to be baptized. Do you do to be saved? No, you do it because you are obedient to the wishes of your heavenly Father. Should I not get baptize because it's outward? You would probably say, "No", as I would to. So, circumcision as Paul taught does not make anyone saved in and of itself.




SpongeBlog -> RE: Keep The Law? - One Stop Thread (9/9/2008 7:41:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
I know it is your opinion that circumcission was necessary for salvation. However, as I have stated before, I believe that circumcission has never been necessary for salvation and that is what Paul is refering to when he says circumcission is "nothing". It is nothing in regard to salvation.

I'm not saying circumcision was necessary for salvation. I'm saying under the old covenant if you didn't circumcise your children, or get circumcised yourself, then you didn't believe. Given the limited amount of knowledge at the time of the law you had no excuse not to obey such an important law except that you simply didn't believe. How much more true for Abraham prior to the law?

If Abraham had not obeyed God when he was told he should be circumcised we would have no choice but to assume that he did not really believe God. Circumcision was indeed a sign of the righteousness Abraham had prior to being circumcised. But, with what we now know in the new covenant, we have spiritual insight that has released us from that required 'proof' (or result) of being declared righteous. Which is what you have been saying--that's it's really all about the heart.





quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Repeatedly, the prophets tell us that the blood of bulls and goats are not what Adonai is looking for, but a humble and contrite heart.

We both know that, but God never told the Israelites to exclude them, but rather make them right and acceptable. Contrast that with the NT which excludes them altogether.


As I stated before, the sacrifices are not excluded but made impossible to practice until the rebuilding of the Temple.

I proved to you from Hebrews that the moment a perfect sacrifice gets made no further sacrifice is necessary for the removal of sin. Remember, or do I need to repost it?





quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Since you chose not to respond to my restatement of my explanation of the relationship between the Spirit and what Yeshua and Paul refer to as "the flesh" I will repost it here.

Here is where you err. Circumcision of the heart does not qualify as being 'marked' in the flesh. Circumcision of the heart is the true sign of the covenant and always has been. Also, flesh and physical are not interchangable terms. Not all physical deeds are fleshly as Yeshua and Paul use the term. The term flesh, it appears to me, is the unguided animal instincts and the desires of self agrandizement and preservation. That is why Yeshua exemplifies the greatest gift, love, by saying greater love has no man than to give his life for his friends. Now giving ones life is a physical act and could be a selfish act. But it need not be and if we do it for the right reasons we become a sweet savor to Adonai. Yeshua and Paul used many more examples of physical acts to guide us into all the truth. If we study, understand and follow those examples we will be blessed. Ha Torah, as clarified and exemplified by Yeshua, is the same. When we study, understand and follow Ha Torah, as clarified and exemplified by Yeshua, we will also be blessed.

Then Christ does not qualify as the 'fulfillment' of the law governing sacrifice for sin. A fulfillment which has released us from the continuing requirement of the law to sacrifice animals for sin, yet he is neither a bull nor a lamb.

If I follow what you say then you and I are still in our sins. And worst of all, because the Temple is gone, have no way of ever doing what's required to be forgiven of those sins. Thank God for the wise way in which God has fulfilled the law without requiring us to actually perform the literal letter of the law. Same principle applies to circumcision. My flesh nature as you define it has been cutoff from me.

quote:

The term flesh, it appears to me, is the unguided animal instincts and the desires of self agrandizement and preservation.


"...11and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ..." (Col. 2:11)

Paul says we have been circumcised in the flesh. The figurative nature of having the flesh nature and it's resultant deeds removed from us qualifies as a fulfillment of the law of circumcision just as Christ qualifies as the fulfillment of the law of animal sacrifice, even though he's neither a bull nor a lamb as required by the letter of the law.




Page: <<   < prev  174 175 [176] 177 178   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI