Bracy -- what is your one point?

Jesus did speak "contrary to the torah", and He was hung on a cross for it.

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.

[This message has been edited by 77 (edited 9/4/2003 7:45p).]

77:

quote:

---

Bracy -- what is your one point?

---

I've repeated it several times already. See my reply to Physics96, directly above:

quote:

---

According to Deuteronomy 18:20-22, any person who spoke “presumptuously” (i.e. contrary to Torah) was to be recognized as a false prophet and be put to death.

So, my question is this: Please explain to me how, if Yeshua did, indeed, teach us that we are now "free from the Torah," that He did not violate His own commandment and be worthy of death.

---

quote:

---

Jesus did speak "contrary to the torah", and He was hung on a cross for it

---

If that is the case, then Yeshua sinned, and His blood cannot atone for our sins. You are saying that Yeshua disobeyed God's commandment just as Adam did.


Bracy

[This message has been edited by Bracy (edited 9/4/2003 7:50p).]

No just that the Jews thought he sinned when in all actuality He was fulfilling God's plan from the beginning by bringing forth a new covenant.

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.

quote:

---

So, my question is this: Please explain to me how, if Yeshua did, indeed, teach us that we are now "free from the Torah," that He did not violate His own commandment and be worthy of death.

---

He didn't speak against it, nor did He tell the Jewish people that they oughtn't practice it. I frankly believe that it is error to teach that it is somehow "sinful" to follow the Law. The point is that the Law is irrelevant to salvation. The Law points the way to salvation with the concept of sin, but it doesn't accomplish anything in that vein, nor is that the reason it was given. So we take it for what it is, and nothing more.

77:

quote:

---

No just that the Jews thought he sinned when in all actuality He was fulfilling God's plan from the beginning by bringing forth a new covenant.

---

No, you quite specifically stated that Yeshua spoke contrary to Torah. You said it these words:

quote:

---

Jesus did speak "contrary to the torah", and He was hung on a cross for it

---

If you Yeshua had, indeed, spoken contrary to Torah, then He committed exactly the same sin that Adam committed, and His death was meaningless and does not have the ability to save.

It really is that simple.


Bracy

Jesus broke the sabbath in John 5:18 -- yet without sin.

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.

Bracy,

You certainly owe me no response, but why did you not tackle my post from page 1 of this thread? I would think that if Paul was really writing scripture, then you must see him and some of the other new testament writers as false prophets.

Why do you go back to Jewish law, being a Gentile, and bring the law forward to this time of a new covenant? Was Deut 18:20-22 really written for all time, forever and forever, or did the law indeed fade away as Paul clearly says?

Do you sacrifice bulls and goats at your services? If not, you are in violation of the law. The type of religion you are subscribing to is nothing more than a mixture of law and grace, something Paul so clearly spoke against, that you have to be spiritually blind to miss it.

Galatians 1:6, I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.

Bracy, a man test of the gospel is grace. If the message excludes grace, or mingles law and grace, it is another gospel, and the preacher of it is accursed.

Physics96:

quote:

---

He didn't speak against it, nor did He tell the Jewish people that they oughtn't practice it. I frankly believe that it is error to teach that it is somehow "sinful" to follow the Law. The point is that the Law is irrelevant to salvation. The Law points the way to salvation with the concept of sin, but it doesn't accomplish anything in that vein, nor is that the reason it was given. So we take it for what it is, and nothing more.

---

I agree with you that the Torah was not given for the purpose of salvation. It's purpose is to describe the life that a saved purpose should live.

Yeshua said "If you love me, you will obey what I command." So if you refuse to obey His commandments, how can you claim to love Him?

We are to be holy, just as the Lord Our God is holy (Lev. 11:44, 45: 19:2, 20:7, 1 Peter 1:16). The Torah is our instruction on how to do that.

Why do you suppose Peter provided the above quote from the Torah if we are no longer expected to live by it?


Bracy

77:

quote:

---

Jesus broke the sabbath in John 5:18 -- yet without sin.

---

Yeshua did *not* break the Sabbath commandment in John 5:18. He broke rabbinic tradition (i.e. man's laws, not God's laws).


Bracy

Oh that's how you get around that. Where is that in the Bible.

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.

[This message has been edited by 77 (edited 9/4/2003 8:18p).]

77:

quote:

---

Oh that's how you get around that. Where is that in the Bible.

---

Do you have the vaguest idea of what "rabbinic halachah" is?

God simply said "On the Sabbath, you will do no work." The Jewish rabbis then attempted to define precisely what "work" is -- even to go so far as to define the number of steps that a person could walk on the Sabbath before it would be considered "work." They even debated over whether or not a person could eat an egg that was laid on the Sabbath.

It is rabbinic halachah, and not the Torah, which Peter described as a "burden that no man could bear" (Acts 15:10). If it was the Torah that he was referring to as "yoke that no man could bear," then why Moses state:

quote:

---

Deuteronomy 30:11-14: Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.

---

Here is a quote from my congregation's website, which may help to explain my position:

quote:

---

However, the plan backfired. Our people have become so frustrated in attempting to please HaShem that a majority of them do not even keep the basic simple instructions of the Torah any more. When looking at the list of 613 commandments, one becomes overwhelmed. They begin to feel that it impossible to please God by following His commandments.

If the Torah’s commandments were to be so overwhelming that we cannot keep them then why did Moshe tell us, “11Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.” (Deuteronomy 30:11-14) We know that Yeshua our Messiah came from heaven to give us the ability to please HaShem. (John 1:1-13) Now that we have his spirit in us we can comply with the commandments and please the Father. Through the new covenant of Yeshua we have the Torah written on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:31-34).

The assembly of the “613 commandments” removes obedience from understanding HaShem and His intention for us. It also makes the people dependant on the rabbis to learn how to keep HaShem’s commandments “properly”. Everyone I know who has begun detailed study of the 613 commandments has given in to the spirit of anti-messiah, the same spirit that drives our Jewish people to reject Yeshua. Every one of them left Zion saying, “I’ll never give up Yeshua my Messiah” but every one of them have given him up.

If we have to go to the rabbis to learn how to keep the commandments, then why did Moshe tell us, “11Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, “Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 13Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, “Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?” 14No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.”

---

[emphasis mine]

EDIT: I forgot to include the url:

http://tzion.org/articles/the_613_commandments.htm


Bracy

[This message has been edited by Bracy (edited 9/4/2003 8:45p).]

Oh so it's your "congregation" that determines what work is?

By the way for my own reference what is the name of this group you worship with?

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.

[This message has been edited by 77 (edited 9/4/2003 8:41p).]

77:

In case you need a scriptural reference to understand, here it is:

quote:

---

Matthew 15:1-9: Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat!" Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' 5But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,' he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

" 'These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
They worship me in vain;
their teachings are but rules taught by men.' "

---

Note here that this passage is talking about Torah vs. rabbinic halachah. The rabbis were accusing Yeshua of breaking the Torah because He and His disciples did not wash their hands. However, there is no such Torah commandment.

quote:

---

Oh so it's your "congregation" that determines what work is?

---

Where did you get that idea? Certainly not from anything that I have said.

I forgot to include the url in my post above. I have since edited it and included the url. You can read the entire article yourself, if you truly wish to understand our position.


Bracy

[This message has been edited by Bracy (edited 9/4/2003 8:47p).]

Let's go back to John 5:18. This is the Holy Spirit speaking through John -- not a direct quote from Pharisees. Do you not believe Jesus is equal with God? It says it as fact in the same exact verse. All 3 statements in that verse are stated as fact. Not 2 true and 1 false. All 3 statements are true as by the Words of the Holy Spirit.

So now you are saying the Holy Spirit was somehow mistaken here?

The reason I said that is you offered no definition except something your "congregation" believes.

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.

[This message has been edited by 77 (edited 9/4/2003 8:52p).]

77:

quote:

---

So now you are saying the Holy Spirit was somehow mistaken here?

---

No, I'm saying that the Jews believed he had broken the Sabbath.

Yeshua merely healed someone on the Sabbath. That is not a violation of the Torah, it was merely a violation of rabbinic halachah.

Question: What did Yeshua say were the two greatest commandments of the Torah?


Bracy

quote:

---

Yeshua said "If you love me, you will obey what I command." So if you refuse to obey His commandments, how can you claim to love Him?

---

I will defer to more learned commentary:

quote:

---

Matthew 22
35] And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question, to test him.
[36] "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?"
[37] And he said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.
[38] This is the great and first commandment.
[39] And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
[40] On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets."
...
Romans 13
[9] The commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not kill, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this sentence, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."
[10] Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

---

I don't refuse to obey them, in that I acknowledge that love is what is expected of me, though I fail often to attain it. But I think that you have confused what the Law was with what the Law was made to be. Paul says "any other commandment" can be placed within his one commandment. His interpretation is true, but you have reduced the Torah into a set of unchanging rules. What matters is not the rule-content of the Torah, but the message therein. In that respect, the modern Jews have a nearer view to the Christian perspective than did the Pharisees or Saducees of the time.

Physics96:

And I will also defer to more learned commentary:

quote:

---

Romans 7:7: Therefore, what are we to say? That the Torah is sinful? Heaven forbid! Rather, the function of the Torah was that without it, I would not have known what sin is. For example, I would not have become conscious of what greed is if the Torah had not said, "Thou shalt not covet."

---

Notice what Paul is saying the "function" of the Torah is: it's "function" is to teach us what sin is and how to live righteously.

quote:

---

1 John 3:4: Everyone who keeps sinning is violating Torah -- indeed, sin is violation of Torah.

---

How does John define "sin?" He defines it as a violation of the Torah.

Simply put, if one does not keep the Torah, then they are sinning. We are commanded to live righteously, and to keep His commandments. That is the behavior that is expected of one who is saved.


Bracy

Bracy,

I see you side stepped that one.

You are saying the Holy Spirit is wrong -- because he is the one speaking through John. God why were the jews looking to kill Jesus? "He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God."

It wasn't the jews of the day "thought" he was breaking the sabbath. The Holy Spirit said He was BREAKING the Sabbath.

Some more support from Paul:

quote:

---

1 Cor 9:20-22 -- To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; 21 to those who arewithout law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law.

---

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.

[This message has been edited by 77 (edited 9/4/2003 9:36p).]

quote:

---

How does John define "sin?" He defines it as a violation of the Torah.

---

Sure, but the question is then begged from the description of Paul: is the Torah a set of rules, or is it more than that? The Pharisees treated it as a set of rules, and it was because it was a set of rules that the interpretation (oral law) was needed to explain them. Other Apostles chimed in too:

quote:

---

1 John 3
[10] By this it may be seen who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not do right is not of God, nor he who does not love his brother.
[11]
For this is the message which you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another,
...
James 2
[8]
If you really fulfil the royal law, according to the scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you do well.
[9] But if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors.
[10] For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it.
[11] For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," said also, "Do not kill." If you do not commit adultery but do kill, you have become a transgressor of the law.
[12] So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty.

---

What is the law?

quote:

---

Micah 6
[6] "With what shall I come before the LORD,
and bow myself before God on high?
Shall I come before him with burnt offerings,
with calves a year old?
[7] Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams,
with ten thousands of rivers of oil?
Shall I give my first-born for my transgression,
the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?"
[8] He has showed you, O man, what is good;
and what does the LORD require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?

---

Certainly, there are commandments that separate the Israelites from others to show that God chose them. But the gift of the Torah is not the set of rules, else they could not be summarized so easily be every single Apostle. The gift of the Torah is meaning, logos, not rules. If it were rules, then Abraham would have lacked it, but it was not rules that made the Israelites chosen. Yeshua said: "On this depend the Law and the prophets." You have turned it upside-down, and made the command to love depend on the rules. The rules are not the Torah. The rules, given by Moses, are a sign of the Torah.

Bracy,

quote:

---

I don't know how to make myself more clear: If you cannot, or will not, address the issue I put forth, then don't even bother replying.

This is not something I'm willing to compromise on, I'm simply not about to spend my time and energy addressing your points if you will not show me the same courtesy.

---

I felt that I had addressed it… perhaps you should continue to restate it…

I can’t exactly remember it… It was something about if I say Jesus fulfilled any of the Law and any of it no longer applies, then I have denied something Moses said in Deuteronomy 13? Which BTW, Moses never used the Word Torah in any of the verses in Deuteronomy 13… Anyway, you might want to rephrase it for me, cause I’m not getting it…

quote:

---

Here you go:

This is a direct quote from the "Judaism 101" website:
quote:

The word "Torah" is a tricky one, because it can mean different things in different contexts. In its most limited sense, "Torah" refers to the Five Books of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. But the word "torah" can also be used to refer to the entire Jewish bible (the body of scripture known to non-Jews as the Old Testament and to Jews as the Tanakh or Written Torah), or in its broadest sense, to the whole body of Jewish law and teachings.



http://www.jewfaq.org/torah.htm

Here is a direct quote from Rabbinic literature:
quote:

Asaph said: ‘Give ear, O my people, to my Law’ (Psalms 78:1), and Solomon said, ‘Forsake ye not my Law’ (Proverbs 4:2). Israel said to Asaph, ‘Is there then another law, that thou speakest of my law? We have already received the Law at Sinai.’ He said to them: ‘There are sinners in Israel who say that the Prophets and the Holy Writings are not Torah, and we will not obey them’ (Daniel 9:10). But the Prophets and the Holy Writings are Torah. Hence it says, ‘Give ear, O my people, to my Law.’

Tanchuma, Re’eh, 10a, quoted from C. G. Montefiore and H. Loewe, A Rabbinic Anthology (Schocken, 1974), 158.



And here is evidence taken directly from scripture:
quote:

1 Corinthians 14:21: In the law it is written, With [men of] other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.



The verse is introduced with the words "In the law, it is written," yet it is quoting Isaiah 28:11.


Bracy

---

I think you are a little confused about what was looking for when I asked…”please offer the evidence that what you said here is true…”

It was in reference to what you said here… “"Torah" is not a catch-all phrase. In literal terms, the "Torah" is the first 5 books of the bible. However, those 5 books serve as the basis for determining the Divine Inspiration of any other book of scripture”

I was looking for more of an answer to the last sentence than the first… But since you focused exclusively on the first, I will address that… Your quotes from these guys are just wrong… A look at the LXX or the Hebrew definitions of those verses will show quite a different picture than what those guys say. There is a lot of different uses for the Hebrew word “towrah”, and the Greek word “nomos” Give the definitions of them in those verses a look. http://www.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?

YYZ:

quote:

---

I felt that I had addressed it… perhaps you should continue to restate it…

---

Okay, I'll try. For point of reference, let me repeat Deuteronomy 18:

quote:

---

Deuteronomy 18:20-22: But the prophet who shall speak a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die. And you may say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.

---

According to Deuteronomy 18:20-22, any person who spoke “presumptuously” (i.e. contrary to Torah) was to be recognized as a false prophet and be put to death.

Main Entry: pre·sume
Pronunciation: pri-'züm
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): pre·sumed; pre·sum·ing

Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin & Middle French; Late Latin praesumere to dare, from Latin, to anticipate, assume, from prae- + sumere to take; Middle French presumer to assume, from Latin praesumere -- more at CONSUME

Date: 14th century
transitive senses

1 : to undertake without leave or clear justification : DARE
2 : to expect or assume especially with confidence
3 : to suppose to be true without proof <presumed innocent until proved guilty>
4 : to take for granted : IMPLY
intransitive senses
1 : to act or proceed presumptuously or on a presumption
2 : to go beyond what is right or proper
- pre·sumed·ly /-'zü-m&d-lE, -'zümd-lE/ adverb
- pre·sum·er noun

Okay, so here is the point: Throughout the entire "Old Testament" scriptures, we find the Israelites being led astray from the Torah time and time again. And time and after time, God sends a prophet to try to lead Israel *back* to the Torah. And, time after time, God punishes them for not obeying His Torah.

But Christianity seems to think that God played some sort of sick joke on the Jews. After being punished so many times in the past, and being driven out of the Promised Land for the refusal to obey the Torah, Christianity seems to think that God suddenly said: "SURPRISE! *THIS* time you were supposed to recognize that you are now 'free from the Torah!'"

So, I'm asking you to explain to me how Yeshua could have "freed us from the Torah," when Deuteronomy 18 quite specifically states the Jews were not to listen to anyone who tried to do just that.

If Yeshua had, as Christianity claims, taught us that we are now "free from the Torah," then this means that Yeshua transgressed God's commandments just as surely as Adam did, and that His death is meaningless, does not atone for our sins, and we are without a hope in the world. Quite simply, if Yeshua had taught us that we are now "free from the Torah," then there is no salvation.

quote:

---

I was looking for more of an answer to the last sentence than the first…

---

Okay, so you're asking for an explanation as to why the Torah is the basis for determining Divine Inspiration? That again comes back to Deuteronomy 18 which I quoted above. God warned the Israelites not to listen to anyone who speaks "presumptuously." To speak presumptiously means to speak contrary to Torah. Therefore, the words of any prophet, such as Isaiah, Ezekiel, or anyone else had to be tested against the Torah to determine whether or not the prophet spoke "prsumptuously."

Note, too, that this is exactly what the Bereans did when they first heard Paul's message, and the writer of Acts commends them for doing so:

quote:

---

Acts 17:10-11: And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming [thither] went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

---

The Bereans were testing Paul's message against the Torah.

quote:

---

Your quotes from these guys are just wrong

---

No, they are not wrong at all. Take a look at Strong's Concordance:

Torah:

Lexicon Results for towrah (Strong's 08451)

Pronunciation Guide
towrah {to-raw'} or torah {to-raw'}

1) law, direction, instruction

a) instruction, direction (human or divine)

1) body of prophetic teaching

2) instruction in Messianic age


3) body of priestly direction or instruction

4) body of legal directives

b) law

1) law of the burnt offering

2) of special law, codes of law

c) custom, manner

d) the Deuteronomic or Mosaic Law

-----------------------------------------------

Nomos:

Lexicon Results for nomos (Strong's 3551)

Pronunciation Guide
nomos {nom'-os}

1) anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, a law, a command

a) of any law whatsoever

1) a law or rule producing a state approved of God

a) by the observance of which is approved of God

2) a precept or injunction

3) the rule of action prescribed by reason

b) of the Mosaic law, and referring, acc. to the context. either to the volume of the law or to its contents

c) the Christian religion: the law demanding faith, the moral instruction given by Christ, esp. the precept concerning love

d) the name of the more important part (the Pentateuch), is put for the entire collection of the sacred books of the OT

----------------------------------------------

The only point of confusion is that Orthodox Judaism maintains that there is an Oral Torah, and a Written Torah, and believe that both were handed down by Moses. They view both as being equally binding. I do not. In fact, I do not believe that the "Oral Torah" was handed down by Moses at all, and I do not believe there is any scriptural basis for an "Oral Torah."

The Written Torah is what Moses referred to when he said: "Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. (Deut. 30:11).

The "Oral Torah" is what Peter was referring to when he said: "Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear?" (Acts 15:10).

It is also the "Oral Torah" which Yeshua was referring to when He said: "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?" (Matthew 15:3).


Bracy

[This message has been edited by Bracy (edited 9/5/2003 2:20a).]

Now we have the Oral Torah, no not of God.

The Law of Moses had rules for what you could eat and how you could divorce. These Old rules are abolished.

Is it lawful for a Christian to eat a pig?
Is it lawful for a Christian to divorce his wife for any reason and be married again?

Of course Jesus didn't break the Law of Moses ever. He perfectly fulfilled it. Yes Bracy it help teaches us what sin is.

Jesus did speak contrary to the Law of Moses!

Matthew 5:31-32"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.'[6] But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

This is speaking new Law, which is contrary to Law of Moses. This is new, this is different, this is superior. Out with the Old in with the New and better.

You can speak all you want about following the Old Law and COVENANT still but Jesus brought the new reality and COVENANT.

quote:

---

Okay, I'll try. For point of reference, let me repeat Deuteronomy 18:
quote:

Deuteronomy 18:20-22: But the prophet who shall speak a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die. And you may say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.



According to Deuteronomy 18:20-22, any person who spoke “presumptuously” (i.e. contrary to Torah) was to be recognized as a false prophet and be put to death.

---

You have failed to bring forth compelling evidence that what most of Christianity teaches is the product of people being led away…. Jesus makes clear in scripture that the law is summed up in love… This is a greater fulfillment of the law…

quote:

---

Okay, so here is the point: Throughout the entire "Old Testament" scriptures, we find the Israelites being led astray from the Torah time and time again. And time and after time, God sends a prophet to try to lead Israel *back* to the Torah. And, time after time, God punishes them for not obeying His Torah.

---

Judges is a primary example of this. Over and over again it happens, and if you will notice it gets worse and worse… This displays the “can’t pull it off” theme that we see throughout the OT among other things.

quote:

---

But Christianity seems to think that God played some sort of sick joke on the Jews. After being punished so many times in the past, and being driven out of the Promised Land for the refusal to obey the Torah, Christianity seems to think that God suddenly said: "SURPRISE! *THIS* time you were supposed to recognize that you are now 'free from the Torah!'"

---

I don’t think that at all… Your view of Christianity is in my opinion somewhat myopic.

quote:

---

So, I'm asking you to explain to me how Yeshua could have "freed us from the Torah," when Deuteronomy 18 quite specifically states the Jews were not to listen to anyone who tried to do just that.

---

He did not free us from it, the Scriptures say he freed us from the curse of it… Jesus teaches that love is the fulfillment of the law.

quote:

---

If Yeshua had, as Christianity claims, taught us that we are now "free from the Torah," then this means that Yeshua transgressed God's commandments just as surely as Adam did, and that His death is meaningless, does not atone for our sins, and we are without a hope in the world. Quite simply, if Yeshua had taught us that we are now "free from the Torah," then there is no salvation.

---

Again, you mischaracterize Christianity, it’s claims, and you continue to mischaracterize the use of the term law in scripture. Since you will pay no heed to how you might be doing that, you will continue to post distorted and untruthful statements like the one above.

quote:

---

Okay, so you're asking for an explanation as to why the Torah is the basis for determining Divine Inspiration? That again comes back to Deuteronomy 18 which I quoted above. God warned the Israelites not to listen to anyone who speaks "presumptuously." To speak presumptiously means to speak contrary to Torah. Therefore, the words of any prophet, such as Isaiah, Ezekiel, or anyone else had to be tested against the Torah to determine whether or not the prophet spoke "prsumptuously."

---

This is simply a theory though.. I see no evidence that this was their standard. Can you point to a council, or something? Perhaps the one in 100 AD, or perhaps some notes from those who wrote the LXX.

quote:

---

Note, too, that this is exactly what the Bereans did when they first heard Paul's message, and the writer of Acts commends them for doing so:
quote:

Acts 17:10-11: And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming [thither] went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.



The Bereans were testing Paul's message against the Torah.

---

Didn’t Jesus say that it was the Law and the prophets that testified of Him? Certainly we see examples of Paul using all of what we have as the OT. I would have to conclude then form the NT evidence that you are wrong.

quote:

---

quote:

Your quotes from these guys are just wrong



No, they are not wrong at all. Take a look at Strong's Concordance:

Torah:

Lexicon Results for towrah (Strong's 08451)

Pronunciation Guide
towrah {to-raw'} or torah {to-raw'}

1) law, direction, instruction

a) instruction, direction (human or divine)

1) body of prophetic teaching

2) instruction in Messianic age


3) body of priestly direction or instruction

4) body of legal directives

b) law

1) law of the burnt offering

2) of special law, codes of law

c) custom, manner

d) the Deuteronomic or Mosaic Law

-----------------------------------------------

---

You prove my point exactly… Your guys say that it all means only the one definition you pointed out. The others that I bolded are excluded. They have distorted everything to mean the Deuteromic or Mosaic Law… The guys reference to LAW in Proverbs 4:2 is not even the word “towrah”, but at least he has enough sense not to continually refer to every usage of the word law as Torah. This is one example of how you take everything and distort it to mean something that it does not mean. Once you can define everywhere where the scripture say the word nomos or towrah as meaning the Deuteromic or Mosaic Law, then you proceed to setup your false doctrines about what is taught or not taught about the law in the NT.



[This message has been edited by YYZ (edited 9/5/2003 5:41p).]

AgGermany -- that is a good point. He more that once said -- it has been said/the law said.... but I say......

BRACY,

I see you side stepped that one.

You are saying the Holy Spirit is wrong -- because he is the one speaking through John. God why were the jews looking to kill Jesus? "He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God."

All 3 are true. Not just 2. All 3 are true -- that is why the Holy Spirit worded it as such. That is just a simple context.

It wasn't the jews of the day "thought" he was breaking the sabbath. The Holy Spirit said He was BREAKING the Sabbath.

Some more support from Paul:

quote:

---

1 Cor 9:20-22 -- To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; 21 to those who arewithout law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law.

---

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.

[This message has been edited by 77 (edited 9/5/2003 1:43p).]

Bracy,

(1) You say if Christ had sinned, His death would mean nothing to us, and we are doomed.

(2) Deuteronomy tells us that anyone who hangs on a tree is de facto sinning.

(3) Paul tells us "Christ became sin for us".

(4) Christ became the Law incarnate. The Law became a living, breathing "Second Adam".

(5) Christ climbed up and was hung on a tree, making Him guilty of the Whole Law. He died. If He was the Law and it was He, how could the Law NOT have died?

(6) There is and never was any power for salvation in the Law, because there is no Gospel, no "good news", in the Law, just as Martin Luther said about the Book of James. If there is no power to save in the Law, what good is it?

(7) Well, Paul said it is a schoolmaster. Its purpose is to give us a grade, and in all cases that grade is "F-----" (Eff minus to the infinite power). We can only "pass" if that grade is 100%.

How does that reconcile with your attitude (or the attitude of anyone that thinks we must "live up to" any standard) about Torah and its purpose for the children of Adam? By your own words you say we must live up to Torah, but then you usually truthfully admit that you really don't and no one can.

Paul said if you try to "live the Law" and succeed (and Jesus did, so it can be done -- by God!), you will achieve eternal life. But, if you try to "live the Law" and fail, you will receive eternal death. And no human except Christ has EVER come within light-years of succeeding. Why?

Because God knows the whole Law, for which we are responsible in its entirety -- and we don't! But, even if we did have enough godliness in us to KNOW the whole Law, we still couldn't live it! To TRY is DEATH. ETERNALLY. FOREVER. What a great goal -- to try to live Torah or any other subset of God's Whole Law -- and be assured of failure and eternal punishment for "making the effort".

The only Law to which we are bound after the Death and Resurrection is the Law of Christ by Grace through Faith. Every other thought, effort and action must be brought into conformity to Christ, and the only way to do that is through trusting Him for all in all.

Bracy, I don’t mean to be obstinate or harsh, but unless you give a response that addresses at least all of the points above, you have addressed nothing about the Law or its application to us.


[This message has been edited by 70mAgE2 (edited 9/5/2003 3:42p).]

YYZ:

quote:

---

You have failed to bring forth compelling evidence that what most of Christianity teaches is the product of people being led away….

---

What you mean I've failed to provide evidence? That's not even something I should have to prove, it's so readily obvious.

Do you keep the Sabbath? If not, you are violating Torah.

Do you keep the Kosher laws? If not, you are violating Torah.

Why are you not keeping them? Because you have been taught that you don't have to -- you have been led astray.

Christianity got this boneheaded idea that the Torah was only given to the "Jews." The fact is, it was given to *Israel* and as followers of Yeshua, you become a member of the family of Israel and the Torah applies to you as well.

quote:

---

Jesus makes clear in scripture that the law is summed up in love… This is a greater fulfillment of the law…

---

Yeshua wasn't saying anything new here. The Torah has *always* been summed up in love, and Yeshua was merely repeating what the rabbis had always taught. Yeshua was a rabbi Himself, and He taught as a rabbi.

opk posted a wonderful article that evidently nobody has bothered to read. If so, that's a real shame, because the article does a wonderful job of explaining why the Torah is still so important and relevant to our lives today.

Here's a quote from it that should help to explain my point:

quote:

---

There are many such laws mentioned in the portion. Employers may not exploit a day laborer who depends on this wage to support himself or herself. A creditor may not enter a private home to take clothing belonging to the debtor. A runaway slave may not be forcibly returned to his owner. The body of a criminal executed may not be left out to be mocked overnight. And of course, special care must be taken for the widows and the orphans, those without clear means of support.

---

Just imagine how the course of history over the past 2000 years would be different if Christianity had kept the Torah.

Yes, the Torah is summed in love, but as imperfect human beings, we don't know *how* to love. The Torah is the detail which tells how to do it, and how to show it. It is a Father's loving instruction to His children. It is our "upbringing."

A child doesn't know it is wrong to steal unless the parent *teaches* that child not to steal. A child does not know that he/she should share unless the parent *teaches* that child to share.

We wouldn't know how to behave either without God teaching us how to behave. The Torah is that teaching.

77:

quote:

---

AgGermany -- that is a good point. He more that once said -- it has been said/the law said.... but I say......

---

That was a common teaching method of the Jewish rabbis. Yeshua was a Jewish rabbi, and He taught as a Jewish rabbi.

Notice He didn't "change" the Torah in His teaching, nor did He make it more lenient. Notice too that He didn't teach that those laws were no longer relevant, or that we no longer needed to follow them. If anything, His interpretation was *stricter.* He was teaching the difference between following the Torah *from the heart* and merely following the letter of the law.

quote:

---

I see you side stepped that one.

---

I didn't sidestep anything. Yeshua did not break the Sabbath. He broke the Jewish rabbis *interpretation* of the Sabbath commandment.

If Yeshua had broken the Sabbath commandment, that would be a violation of Torah. He would have broken God's commandment just as surely as Adam did, and would have fallen from Heaven, and His death would not atone for our sins. It would be He disobeyed God's commandment.

Again, I'll remind you of John's definition of sin:

quote:

---

1 John 3:4: Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

---

Sin is transgression of the Torah. The Sabbath is a commandment of the Torah, and if Yeshua had broken that commandment, then He would not be the perfect and holy sacrifice necessary to atone for our sins. You *really* don't want to continue with this argument. If you insist that Yeshua broke the Sabbath, then there is no salvation.


Bracy

[This message has been edited by Bracy (edited 9/6/2003 3:38a).]

quote:

---

I didn't sidestep anything. Yeshua did not break the Sabbath. He broke the Jewish rabbis *interpretation* of the Sabbath commandment.

If Yeshua had broken the Sabbath commandment, that would be a violation of Torah. He would have broken God's commandment just as surely as Adam did, and would have fallen from Heaven, and His death would not atone for our sins. It would be He disobeyed God's commandment.

---

I don't know what to call a statement like this as I am not a lawyer.

That is the WHOLE POINT Bracy -- Jesus did break the Sabbath. It was NOT an interpretation by rabbis. It was an interpretation by the HOLY SPIRIT. God is the one who inspired the scripture not man. OK lets go from there. God, why are the jews trying to kill Jesus? "He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God."

All 3 are true. Not just 2. All 3 are true -- that is why the Holy Spirit worded it as such. That is just a simple context.

It wasn't the jews of the day "thought" he was breaking the sabbath. The Holy Spirit said He was BREAKING the Sabbath.

Pharrisees didn't write that -- rabbis didn't write that -- THE HOLY SPIRIT DID. It is not a quote from what man thinks, but a statement of FACT.

So yes you did sidestep it with your same rabbis interpretation which doesn't hold water because it is not Biblical, and the fact that it is not a quote, but rather a statement of FACT written by the HOLY SPIRIT.

As the word of God says -- Jesus broke the Sabbath -- YET WITHOUT SIN.

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.

quote:

---

Do you keep the Sabbath? If not, you are violating Torah.

Do you keep the Kosher laws? If not, you are violating Torah.

---

Did Abraham keep the Mosaic Law? No, but was righteous. Moreover, St. Paul the Apostle uses him as an example of righteousness even under the new covenant. How could he be righteous if he wasn't keeping the Mosaic Law? I'll say it again, the rules of the Torah are not the Torah. Keeping Torah is not the same as following a set of rules; it was made into that by Pharisees and Saducees. In fact, I took opk's article in exactly the opposite sense, because it spoke of Torah as wisdom behind rules, not rules per se. What you seem to be missing is that it is the wisdom that matters, not the method you use to get there. But that is unsurprising, because you would have to get past the rules to the wisdom to accept that.

77:

Yeshua most certainly did *NOT* break the Sabbath. The author was not stating that Yeshua broke the Sabbath, he was repeating the claim of the rabbis. He was speaking metaphorically.

Do you believe that the wine and bread are literally Yeshua's body and blood?


Physics96:

quote:

---

Did Abraham keep the Mosaic Law?

---

Yes, Abraham kept the "Mosaic" Law.

The Torah was not established on Mount Sinai, it was *re*-established, because the Jews had forgotten it while they dwelled in Egypt. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob lived by the very same Torah. The only difference is, Moses wrote it down.

The Torah is the very definition of "right" and "wrong." What was right and wrong in Moses' day was right and wrong in Abraham's day -- that never changed. And it remains the same standard of right and wrong today.

Notice:

quote:

---

Genesis 38:8: And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

---

Judah told his son Onan to marry his brother's wife and raise up seed for his brother.

quote:

---

Deuteronomy 25:5-6: If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband's brother unto her. And it shall be, [that] the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother [which is] dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.

---

Here is the Torah commandment prescribing that a man marry his childless brother's widow.

How do you suppose Judah knew to do this if the Torah wasn't established until Moses' day?

God commanded Noah to gather 2 of every unclean animal, and 7 of every clean animal. How do you suppose Noah knew what was "clean" and what was "unclean" if the Torah wasn't established until Mount Sinai?


Bracy

[This message has been edited by Bracy (edited 9/6/2003 9:49a).]

quote:

---

What you mean I've failed to provide evidence? That's not even something I should have to prove, it's so readily obvious.

Do you keep the Sabbath? If not, you are violating Torah.

Do you keep the Kosher laws? If not, you are violating Torah.

Why are you not keeping them? Because you have been taught that you don't have to -- you have been led astray.

Christianity got this boneheaded idea that the Torah was only given to the "Jews." The fact is, it was given to *Israel* and as followers of Yeshua, you become a member of the family of Israel and the Torah applies to you as well.

---

The Lord promises to lead His church in truth. Most of Christianity throughout history He has done this with. If a few thousand people decide that the rest of Christianity has interpreted scripture wrong all these years. That the councils of the early Church have been wrong. That all of the great Christian minds over the years have been wrong, then it must be concluded that the sect that arrives at these novel interpretations is wrong. Your claims are no different from Mormons, or Jehovah’s Witnesses, and your view of Solo Scriptura has led you down this path.

quote:

---

Yeshua wasn't saying anything new here. The Torah has *always* been summed up in love, and Yeshua was merely repeating what the rabbis had always taught. Yeshua was a rabbi Himself, and He taught as a rabbi.

opk posted a wonderful article that evidently nobody has bothered to read. If so, that's a real shame, because the article does a wonderful job of explaining why the Torah is still so important and relevant to our lives today.

---

Yes, even the secular scholars agree that Jesus made a radical expansion of the law in His sermon on the mount. He taught that it was in the heart and not externally that one would be sinning. He showed everyone that it was a changed heart that they needed, and this is what the Lord promised. To give us a new heart to obey.

quote:

---

Here's a quote from it that should help to explain my point:
quote:

There are many such laws mentioned in the portion. Employers may not exploit a day laborer who depends on this wage to support himself or herself. A creditor may not enter a private home to take clothing belonging to the debtor. A runaway slave may not be forcibly returned to his owner. The body of a criminal executed may not be left out to be mocked overnight. And of course, special care must be taken for the widows and the orphans, those without clear means of support.



Just imagine how the course of history over the past 2000 years would be different if Christianity had kept the Torah.

Yes, the Torah is summed in love, but as imperfect human beings, we don't know *how* to love. The Torah is the detail which tells how to do it, and how to show it. It is a Father's loving instruction to His children. It is our "upbringing."

A child doesn't know it is wrong to steal unless the parent *teaches* that child not to steal. A child does not know that he/she should share unless the parent *teaches* that child to share.

We wouldn't know how to behave either without God teaching us how to behave. The Torah is that teaching.

---

Again, you write to me as if I have stated that moral law should be done away with. How many times do I have to say that, before you will stop ignoring it? It just shows that you don’t even know my position, because you are apparently too busy telling me how I am wrong to pay attention to what I have said. As far as looking at the OT judicial laws, certainly our founders did this as this nation was formed. Thankfully however it was not some guys who thought the Torah applied to the NT that formed this nation, and so the seeds for the end of slavery were sewn in our constitution. Your view never would have made an America the way it is.

By the way, you have never really answered any of my posts. You just respond back a bunch of stuff, but each time I nail you where you have distorted interpretations by making law always and exclusively = to the Deutorocanonical and Mosaic laws you have skirted the issue. Rather than face the reality, you just move on to something else. Perhaps you are where you need to be.

As a side note, I do not believe that Jesus broke any laws either, but that He perfectly fulfilled the law, so that He would be found perfectly righteous by the Father. In so doing His record of righteousness become ours, and our record of unrighteousness was His to be bourn on the cross. This great exchange is our hope. Not only did Christ die for us, but He lived for us as well.
Bracy is right about this. Had He sinned, we would have no hope of salvation. He did not come to abolish OT law, but to fulfill it. He fulfilled the law perfectly, and so we are no longer under the curse of the law. We therefore wear His righteousness as a robe. We are baptized into Him, and so what is true of Him is true of us. We are positionally justified, and sanctified. We are even currently seated in the heaven right now, as we are IN him, and He is IN us. Therefore there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
Some act as if there are NT laws that we must obey to be In Christ. This is simply wrong. We are in Christ by faith, and we do His will willingly. As we set our minds on the things above, we walk in the spirit, and do not carry out the desires of the flesh. The response to antinomianism that those who emphasize mans freewill do is a contingency of self determination, a you must do this, you must do that. It is a distortion of Christianity.

Bracy: You and St. Paul fight it out.

quote:

---

Romans 4
[10] How then was it reckoned to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised.
[11] He received circumcision as a sign or seal of the righteousness which he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised and who thus have righteousness reckoned to them,
[12] and likewise the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but also follow the example of the faith which our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.
[13]
The promise to Abraham and his descendants, that they should inherit the world, did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith.
[14] If it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void.
[15] For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.
[16]
That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his descendants -- not only to the adherents of the law but also to those who share the faith of Abraham, for he is the father of us all,

---

Re: your assertion that the Torah has been the same throughout the ages, I would first note that not even Jewish scholars make such an assertion. But more to the point, it's not even logically consistent.

For example, Judah gave instruction to Onan to follow what is allegedly a Torah law. Do you happen to know what the penalty was for violating that law?

quote:

---

Deut. 25
[8] Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak to him: and if he persists, saying, `I do not wish to take her,'
[9] then his brother's wife shall go up to him in the presence of the elders, and pull his sandal off his foot, and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, `So shall it be done to the man who does not build up his brother's house.'
[10] And the name of his house shall be called in Israel, The house of him that had his sandal pulled off.

---

In other words, the penalty was being subject to public shame. What was the penalty for Onan? What was the "detestable thing" that Onan did, when even Torah law did not provide for death? If the point were to demonstrate the eternity of the rules given by Moses, then Onan wouldn't have been struck dead, he would have been shamed.

Nor is your assertion that they had forgotten the Torah even sufficient to explain the existence of the law in Deuteronomy. Look at the phrasing of the law:

quote:

---

Deut. 25
[5]
"If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the dead shall not be married outside the family to a stranger; her husband's brother shall go in to her, and take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her.

---

The duty was already *known*, because the law doesn't specify what the duty is. If the people had forgotten what the duty was, then this law would not explain it to them. Clearly, then, the law doesn't provide the duty; it provides the procedure and penalty for laxity in the duty. So if your argument is that they forgot the procedure and penalty for this violation, then why does the story of Onan have Onan being killed, if this is an illustration of the operation of the Torah? In fact, doesn't it seem more plausible that Onan is being punished not merely for breaking the law, but the *way* in which he broke it (spilling his seed), a sin which is nowhere mentioned explicitly in the law from Mt. Sinai? Imagine that: a wrong that is not spelled out in the Mosaic law! Cases like this are exactly why Jewish scholars don't take the position that the Mosaic Law was present even before Mount Sinai, but instead speak of the Noahide law.

And speaking of which, the reason Noah knew clean and unclean is exactly that he had a culture that included the concepts, not because he was bound to a set of rules. Those things were innate, known, and they continued to be known throughout Jewish history. The fact that God used the cultural characteristics of the Jews to separate them from others doesn't divinize Jewish culture; it merely reflects their status as chosen people. St. Paul addresses this in Galatians and Romans, but the error persists: a dogmatic literalism about rules that reverses the order (the people were not chosen because they were given the rules; the rules were chosen because of the people). Separateness from the world is holiness, but holiness is not defined by the particular people's separateness. Instead, the separateness of the Jewish people is a figure for the holiness of the Church.

YYZ:

quote:

---

The Lord promises to lead His church in truth. Most of Christianity throughout history He has done this with.

---

Nothing could be further fromt he truth.

You want to talk about church history? Let's look at church history:

--------------------------------------------

(1) Origen, Bishop of Alexandria – accused Jews of plotting in their meetings to kill Christians.

Origen, wrote: "We may thus assert in utter confidence that the Jews will not return to their earlier situation, for they have committed the most abominable of crimes, in forming the conspiracy against the Savior of the human race ... Hence the city where Jesus suffered was necessarily destroyed, the Jewish nation was driven from its country, and another people [meaning the church] was called by God to the blessed election."

(2) Eusebius – alleged that Jews each year at the holiday of Purim engaged in ceremonial killing of Christian children.

Eusebius, Bishop of Caesaria, claimed that Jews in every community crucified a Christian at their Purim festival as a rejection of Jesus. He used the charge of ritual murder made by the pagans Democritus and Apion, which the Romans had first made against the early Christians. Eusebius made a distinction between Hebrews who were good men in the Old Testament and Jews whom he characterized as evil.

(3) St. Hillary of Poitiers – said Jews were a perverse people, forever accursed by God.

(4) St Chrysostom – said that there could never be expiation for the Jews and that God had always hated them. He called it incumbent on all Christians to hate the Jews. The Jews, he said, were assassins of Christ and worshippers of the devil.

Emperor Theodosius protected the Jews from the church's persecutions of heretics. Chrysostom and Ambrose of Milan - both sainted - wanted to include Jews in this persecution. Chrysostom: "The Jews are the most worthless of all men... They are perfidious murderers of Christ. They worship the devil, their religion is a sickness..." Ambrose reprimanded the emperor for rebuilding a synagogue and offered to burn it down himself. St. Gregory of Nyssa characterized Jews as assassins of the prophets, companions of the devil, a race of vipers, a sanhedrin of demons, enemies of all that is beautiful, hogs and goats in their lewd grossness."

(5) St Cyril – gave the Jews within his jurisdiction the option of conversion, exile, or stoning to death.

St. Cyril, the Bishop of Alexandria, incited a mob against the Jews and had them expelled. Bishop Severus burned a synagogue and incited people to attack and harass Jews in the streets. Many Jews converted to Christianity out of fear.

(6) St Jerome – “Proved” that Jews are incapable of understanding the Scriptures, and that they should be severely persecuted until they profess “the true faith.”

St. Jerome, who had studied with Jewish scholars in Palestine and translated the Bible into Latin (the Vulgate), wrote about the synagogue: "If you call it a brothel, a den of vice, the Devil's refuge, Satan's fortress, a place to deprave the soul, an abyss of every conceivable disaster or whatever you will, you are still saying less than it deserves."

(7) St. Augustine – called Judaism a “corruption”. The true image of the Jew, he said, was Judas Iscariot, forever guilty and ignorant spiritually.

St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo: "The true image of the Hebrew is Judas Iscariot, who sells the Lord for silver. The Jew can never understand the Scriptures and forever will bear the guilt for the death of Jesus."

(8) Bishop Severus of Majorca - forced Jews to convert. Violent street fighting broke out with a mob incited by the bishop. The synagogue was burnt. Finally the leaders of the Jewish community gave in and 540 Jews were converted.

(9) Martin Luther – called Jews ritual murderers, poisoners of wells, and called for all Talmuds and synagogues to be destroyed.

http://www.jcrelations.net

----------------------------------------------

Are these the "great minds" you speak of?

The fact of the matter is, the early church founders were anti-semitic. They viewed the Torah as a "Jewish thing" and wanted no part of it. They considered the Torah to be nothing more than "Jewish superstition" and were about to do anything that they considered to be "Jewish."

quote:

---

Yes, even the secular scholars agree that Jesus made a radical expansion of the law in His sermon on the mount. He taught that it was in the heart and not externally that one would be sinning. He showed everyone that it was a changed heart that they needed, and this is what the Lord promised. To give us a new heart to obey.

---

That's exactly my point! Yeshua taught us to obey the Torah from the heart but Christianity teaches that we don't have to obey at all!

quote:

---

Again, you write to me as if I have stated that moral law should be done away with. How many times do I have to say that, before you will stop ignoring it?

---

You'll have to keep repeating until you actually mean what you say. If you're not keeping the Sabbath or the kosher laws, for instance, then you're not keeping even that portion of the Torah which you claim to believe hasn't been done away with. In short, your actions don't match your words.

Secondly, there is no scriptural support for the notion that the Torah should be divided up in this way, and that we now only need to keep that portion referred to as "Moral Law." It was Thomas Aquinas who divided the Torah in this way -- a non-Torah educated gentile.

It completely boggles my mind how Christians make such a fuss over the removal of the 10 Commandments from public places when Christianity doesn't even keep half of them!

quote:

---

By the way, you have never really answered any of my posts. You just respond back a bunch of stuff, but each time I nail you where you have distorted interpretations by making law always and exclusively = to the Deutorocanonical and Mosaic laws you have skirted the issue.

---

That isn't true at all, I've answered every one of your points, directly and explicitly.
Here you are, making the claim that I don't answer your points, while I'm still waiting for you to respond to my point, which I repeatedly requested no less than half a dozen times!


Bracy

[This message has been edited by Bracy (edited 9/6/2003 1:00p).]

Bracy,

I hope you come to the realization that we are under Christ's law.

I have sincerely showed the scripture in a clear manner. I will keep you and your group in mind.

Take Care and keep studying,
77

texags77@yahoo.com
Please feel free to respond by email.