Announcement

Collapse

Judaism Guidelines

Theists only.

Shalom!


This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the world religion of Judaism in general and also its relationship to Christianity. This forum is generally for theists only. Non-theists (eg, atheistic Jews) may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.

Non-theists are welcome to discuss and debate issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Why should I believe in Jesus and the NT?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    [QUOTE=JohnnyP;109432]I'm not sure if this thread is still active but as to the point of compelling all nations to serve God:

    Isaiah 11:10 And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.

    I think there's something to be said about over half the world believing in the God of Israel AND in Jesus, albeit with different views in Islam and in Christianity.
    Not something that is convincing considering the fallibility of human nature and the fact that you are arguing the fallacy of popularity.

    Versus according to some statistics, .2% of the world being Jews not believing in Jesus and of them, perhaps over half not even believing in the God of Israel, identifying as Jews ethnically not religiously.
    Apathy of religious belief and commitment is a problem in Christianity also.

    What is it about Jesus that causes such great belief in the God of Israel, and being without Jesus causes disbelief?
    Good question, but not resolved in the belief in Christianity.

    I'm one of those who don't see Jesus, Paul, or anyone in the NT abolishing Torah for Jews. Jesus said it stands until heaven and earth pass, which according to Revelation happens at Judgment when death is no more, indicating that at least some of the Laws regarding the death penalty are no longer relevant.

    That perception exists mainly because Paul is such a primary character in the NT and his mission was to Gentiles who aren't compelled to observe all Torah either in Christianity or Judaism, a rough sketch of Noahide being found in Acts 15.
    Jesus did change and clarify some Laws of the Torah, but this has become a very murky and confusing issue in the History of Christianity.

    I'm not certain any Messianic prophecies claim that all Jews must first be united under God, then come all the Gentiles to belief, especially since things have moved in an opposite direction to that on a global basis.
    Messianic prophesies remain another murky and confusing issue concerning the prophesies Christ claimed to fulfill and those that point to the future beyond Christ.

    I think my post in the virgin birth thread also gives some compelling reasons, and overall questions the idea that if one is killed he can't be Messiah, since this dismisses the possibility of resurrection to complete the mission. I'm not aware of any prophecy restricting that, or any time limit imposed as to whether it should take 2 or 2000 years. Some Jews are certainly waiting for Elijah to return to complete his mission, for example.

    I'll offer those two topics to start.
    Some of the confusing claims of prophesy in the New Testament remain a problem in terms of there actual meaning in Jewish terms. The Doctrines and Dogma of Christianity defining the Trinity remains an insurmountable barrier to traditional Judaism. The persecution and ethic cleansing of Jews over the Millennia remain problematic for Jews to become Christians. The beliefs of Islam and the Baha'i Faith are more consistent and in line with Old Testament beliefs concerning the nature of God.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      Not something that is convincing considering the fallibility of human nature and the fact that you are arguing the fallacy of popularity.
      I'm not arguing solely that because more believe in Jesus it must be true, I figured this would come up. Unfortunately if Messianic qualifications are that he brings many Gentiles to belief in God, the question of numbers can't be avoided.

      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      Apathy of religious belief and commitment is a problem in Christianity also.
      The phenomena of Christian atheism does exist as a fringe, not as a possible majority though. I personally don't know any. And I'm not aware of any type of Muslim atheism.

      As for commitment, sure, there are all levels. I'm not a big church goer myself though I think I should be, I let life get in the way of observance sometimes.

      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      Good question, but not resolved in the belief in Christianity.
      Remember I include Islam too, the Quran acknowledges Jesus as Messiah and Muslims believe him a prophet, they don't reject him in other words.

      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      Jesus did change and clarify some Laws of the Torah, but this has become a very murky and confusing issue in the History of Christianity.
      He gave some Oral Torah, such as you shouldn't be a hypocrite stoning others for their private sins while you go unpunished hiding your secret sins. But that's just common sense that can be applied to anyone. We don't want judges handing out death sentences to murderers if judges themselves are closet serial killers, for example.

      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      Messianic prophesies remain another murky and confusing issue concerning the prophesies Christ claimed to fulfill and those that point to the future beyond Christ.

      Some of the confusing claims of prophesy in the New Testament remain a problem in terms of there actual meaning in Jewish terms. The Doctrines and Dogma of Christianity defining the Trinity remains an insurmountable barrier to traditional Judaism. The persecution and ethic cleansing of Jews over the Millennia remain problematic for Jews to become Christians. The beliefs of Islam and the Baha'i Faith are more consistent and in line with Old Testament beliefs concerning the nature of God.
      Many Hasidic Jews don't have a problem with God manifesting himself in man so much that the man is the same as God. All prophets became as God to some extent, thought of in that way Jesus is simply the fullest extent. He was still a man with a human nature that suffered all temptations as anyone else, from the body of David.

      Other religious Jews believe in the Shekinah as well, that God is not simply one person but has a feminine aspect. This is often ignored when discussing Trinity.

      As for Islam I include it in my assessment, and the Quran is not so much against the Christian Trinity but against a Trinity of the Father and Mary producing the Son Jesus, the three of them as gods.

      Bahai accepts Jesus too. Remember I'm not saying all views of Jesus and God are the same as Christianity, not even all Christians have a unified view. Rather that where there is belief in the God of Israel, a majority of those accept Jesus on some level, they don't deny him as a false prophet or as non-existent.

      The persecution of Jews is problematic for many of them to even believe in God since if there is a God, He allowed it to happen. But flipped around it could be said that many Canaanites may not have wanted to become Jews because Jews slaughtered a lot of them. I'm not sure that says anything about validity of either Christianity or Judaism.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
        I'm one of those who don't see Jesus, Paul, or anyone in the NT abolishing Torah for Jews. Jesus said it stands until heaven and earth pass, which according to Revelation happens at Judgment when death is no more, indicating that at least some of the Laws regarding the death penalty are no longer relevant.
        Romans 7:7a What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin.

        1 John 3:4 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

        Breaking the Torah is sin, so anyone who is not free to sin is not free to break the Torah. if it is important for anyone not free to sin,

        That perception exists mainly because Paul is such a primary character in the NT and his mission was to Gentiles who aren't compelled to observe all Torah either in Christianity or Judaism, a rough sketch of Noahide being found in Acts 15.
        Acts 15:20
        Pollution by idols, fornication, blood, and from things strangled.

        Noahide laws:
        Social laws, prohibition against idolatry, adultery, eating the flesh of a living animal, blasphemy, and bloodshed.

        Comparing the two, they didn’t include social laws because if they were joining a community of people those would have already been established. There’s a match for idolatry, adultery, and eating the flesh of a living animal, but no match for blasphemy or bloodshed. Then there’s one prohibition on the Apostle’s side against things strangled that has no match with the Noahide.

        From this, we can see that it’s not a complete list of what is required of a non-Jew because some very important things have been left out of the Noahide laws, primarily bloodshed and blasphemy. Do you suppose it was ok for Gentiles to commit those things? Of course not, that would be ridiculous, but it’s no more ridiculous to think that this is a complete list of what is going to be required for non-Jews. If it’s not a complete list, then it must be a specific list with a specific purpose.

        “Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God”.

        This is for those new Gentiles who are turning to God. It is not for all Gentiles, but those who are new. This is a minimum requirement.

        Masechet Yoma:

        Laws of Conversion:
        The procedure established by the tannaim, according to which a non-Jew may be accepted into the Jewish faith, was elucidated as follows: "In our days, when a proselyte comes to be converted, we say to him: `What is your objective? Is it not known to you that today the people of Israel are wretched, driven about, exiled, and in constant suffering?' If he say: `I know of this and do not have the merit,' we accept him immediately and we inform him of some of the lighter precepts and of some of the severer ones ... we inform him of the chastisement for the transgression of these precepts... and we also inform him of the reward for observing these precepts... we should not overburden him nor be meticulous with him..."

        This isn’t something new. The Jews in the Diaspora had this problem all along with overburdening new Gentiles who were turning to God.

        The other clue that the four laws in Acts 15:19 aren’t all encompassing is that it has an additional law to abstain from things that have been strangled. Jews killed their animals by slicing the throat in order to get the blood out of it, so they are saying that is binding on Gentiles to eat meat only from animals that have been properly killed. This is further binding than the Noahide laws because it prohibits eating blood from a living animal, but this also includes that of a dead animal.

        The point is that if you have Jews and Gentiles sitting down together for a meal to have fellowship, and one can’t eat meat with blood in it, then the Gentile has to take care that he doesn’t put anything on the table that’s not kosher. He doesn’t want the Jewish person to transgress the law. So if you’re going to have fellowship, then you need to have some common laws.

        This is much more than a simple quotation of the Noahide laws because by careful comparison we can see that it’s a thoughtful, prayerful judgment according to God’s Torah that will allow the circumcised to have fellowship with the uncircumcised. It won't make it difficult for new Gentiles turning to Jesus and will give them time to learn of the other things about keeping the Torah.

        Acts 15:21 For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”

        It’s no different today because we also have minimum requirements for new people who join our congregations. If we invited a New Ager and he gets out a bunch of crystals, then that’s something that we wouldn’t allow. Besides being a sin, it’s offensive to other members of the congregation, so ceasing to follow paganism would be a minimum requirement.
        "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

        Comment


        • #34
          [QUOTE]
          Originally posted by Soyeong View Post
          Romans 7:7a What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin.

          1 John 3:4 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

          Breaking the Torah is sin, so anyone who is not free to sin is not free to break the Torah. if it is important for anyone not free to sin,
          You can become robotic following the law. Just like when the official came to Jesus and said "Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" and Jesus replied back saying, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone.…" - You know the commandments"

          The Jewish people "knew" the law - but within themselves they had to understand the reasoning's behind them. In school, and as a student, you begin to learn the basics - eventually you achieve a high level of education. In a religious sense, the Jewish people knew the basic parts of the law - back then, the laws and scripture were "read to them" - but there needs to be a time to understand what you're following and other times, you may not, "the secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law." You have to at some point have "trust - and faith" - it is very difficult to let go and let God into your life. You have to get away from the robotic - the everyday routine of the law. That comes with time and study - Psalms 119, is a good source for someone who wants the knowledge but asks for God's wisdom. You can have knowledge of the law without the wisdom of the law but what good would it do - it's like a "dead man walking" if God doesn't give his wisdom to the student of the law. "Seek God's face" - or as Jesus puts it ""Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you."


          For example: The term emunah, which is rendered in English as "faith" or "belief," occurs for the first time in the Torah in connection with Abraham.

          After obeying God's command to leave his family and home, Abraham is led to the land which God promises to give to his descendants. Famine forces him to sojourn in Egypt, where his wife Sarah's beauty almost precipitates a tragedy. Back in the land promised by God, Abraham and his nephew Lot find that they cannot live together in peace, and each goes his own way. Lot is captured by enemies and then freed by Abraham.



          Acts 15:20
          Pollution by idols, fornication, blood, and from things strangled.

          Noahide laws:
          Social laws, prohibition against idolatry, adultery, eating the flesh of a living animal, blasphemy, and bloodshed.

          Comparing the two, they didn’t include social laws because if they were joining a community of people those would have already been established. There’s a match for idolatry, adultery, and eating the flesh of a living animal, but no match for blasphemy or bloodshed. Then there’s one prohibition on the Apostle’s side against things strangled that has no match with the Noahide.

          From this, we can see that it’s not a complete list of what is required of a non-Jew because some very important things have been left out of the Noahide laws, primarily bloodshed and blasphemy. Do you suppose it was ok for Gentiles to commit those things? Of course not, that would be ridiculous, but it’s no more ridiculous to think that this is a complete list of what is going to be required for non-Jews. If it’s not a complete list, then it must be a specific list with a specific purpose.

          “Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God”.

          This is for those new Gentiles who are turning to God. It is not for all Gentiles, but those who are new. This is a minimum requirement.

          Masechet Yoma:

          Laws of Conversion:
          The procedure established by the tannaim, according to which a non-Jew may be accepted into the Jewish faith, was elucidated as follows: "In our days, when a proselyte comes to be converted, we say to him: `What is your objective? Is it not known to you that today the people of Israel are wretched, driven about, exiled, and in constant suffering?' If he say: `I know of this and do not have the merit,' we accept him immediately and we inform him of some of the lighter precepts and of some of the severer ones ... we inform him of the chastisement for the transgression of these precepts... and we also inform him of the reward for observing these precepts... we should not overburden him nor be meticulous with him..."

          This isn’t something new. The Jews in the Diaspora had this problem all along with overburdening new Gentiles who were turning to God.

          The other clue that the four laws in Acts 15:19 aren’t all encompassing is that it has an additional law to abstain from things that have been strangled. Jews killed their animals by slicing the throat in order to get the blood out of it, so they are saying that is binding on Gentiles to eat meat only from animals that have been properly killed. This is further binding than the Noahide laws because it prohibits eating blood from a living animal, but this also includes that of a dead animal.

          The point is that if you have Jews and Gentiles sitting down together for a meal to have fellowship, and one can’t eat meat with blood in it, then the Gentile has to take care that he doesn’t put anything on the table that’s not kosher. He doesn’t want the Jewish person to transgress the law. So if you’re going to have fellowship, then you need to have some common laws.

          This is much more than a simple quotation of the Noahide laws because by careful comparison we can see that it’s a thoughtful, prayerful judgment according to God’s Torah that will allow the circumcised to have fellowship with the uncircumcised. It won't make it difficult for new Gentiles turning to Jesus and will give them time to learn of the other things about keeping the Torah.

          Acts 15:21 For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”

          Come, make us gods that shall go before us: The people wanted gods to go before them, leading them to the Promised Land. They knew the Lord led them out of Egypt and they knew the Lord God had revealed Himself at Mount Sinai. Yet, they were willing to trust a god they could make to finish what the Lord began. 1. "As later Israel wanted a human king, not the invisible divine king (1 Samuel 8:4-8), so now they want a god 'with a face', like everybody else." (Cole) 2. Centuries later, the Apostle Paul dealt with the same error with the Galatians: Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you know being made perfect by the flesh? (Galatians 3:3) It is possible to begin the Christian life trusting Jesus, and then at a later time to trust self or one's own spirituality. Following our own gods is no better for us than it was for ancient Israel.

          You don't need idols - to show that you worship another god. In our everyday life - and even harder "now then ever" the temptations are out and about (I think) even more than yesterday because we access to so much through the media. READ the book of James: James 1 New International Version (NIV) 1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,

          To the twelve tribes scattered among the nations:

          Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. 23 Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like someone who looks at his face in a mirror 24 and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. 25 But whoever looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues in it—not forgetting what they have heard, but doing it—they will be blessed in what they do.
          Last edited by mitzi; 10-19-2014, 07:00 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            You can become robotic following the law. Just like when the official came to Jesus and said "Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" and Jesus replied back saying, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone.…" - You know the commandments"
            God did not give His instructions to His people so that they would act like robots, so there is nothing innately robotic about it, though I would agree that it can be followed in the wrong way. I also agree that since the time of Abraham, obeying God's instructions has been about faith. In Psalms 119, the law is given high praise and there is no hint that it was followed robotically or considered to be any sort or burden. Indeed, God said that it was not too hard to follow:

            Deuteronomy 30:11-14 For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ 14 But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.

            In school, and as a student, you begin to learn the basics - eventually you achieve a high level of education.
            Galatians 3:24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.

            "If your father were king and you were a young child destined to rule one day, he would get a tutor to train you and teach you what you would need to know to rule the kingdom when your time came. He would give the tutor authority to teach, discipline, and punish you.

            When your time came, would you immediately shoot your tutor, reject everything he had ever taught you, and then have the audacity to proclaim your actions to be in accordance with the wishes, desires, and intentions of your father the king? The tutor is not the king. He is given by the king to train those who will one day rule. They must be trained so that they can properly make decisions and act in the liberty, freedom, responsibility, and position they will one day have.

            The tutor is there so that you might take his lessons to heart, so that they might become a natural part of your thought processes. You are to rule according to what you have learned, even though the tutor no longer has authority to control or punish you. You will not need to be controlled from then outside, because you will have accepted what you have been taught. You will be controlled from within your heart. It will be your second nature."

            Come, make us gods that shall go before us: The people wanted gods to go before them, leading them to the Promised Land.
            I'm not sure how the 2nd half of your response relates to what you quoted from me.
            "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

            Comment


            • #36
              Soyeong: I should clarify that when I said some Laws are no longer relevant, I meant after Judgment, not now. I don't know if you were commenting on that or not.

              As for Noahide I'm not necessarily promoting it or saying that it exactly duplicates anything in the NT, but I'm countering the common argument that the NT and particularly Paul encourage Jews to abandon Torah in some kind of evil counterfeit Judaism. When in fact those complaints are often based on what is said to Gentiles, and when Judaism has similar teachings that don't compel Gentiles to fully convert to be Jews.

              There's also no directive for men like Titus to "be circumcised and start observing Torah later, just hold off on it for now." In fact the following essentially mirrors Judaism in that Gentiles are actually discouraged from converting. I don't believe Judaism just came up with this attitude out of thin air, but that it was a view shared by Jews like those in Acts 15 vs. Judaizers who insisted on full conversion:

              1 Corinthians 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.

              Where if you are to be a Jew you don't abandon Torah, and if you are to be a Gentile it's not necessary to fully convert, although I don't take it to mean you can't. Rather that you shouldn't convert as if it's a magical charm guaranteeing you salvation, especially since it's a great responsibility carrying more ways to sin if you don't try to observe all Torah. But if you are called to convert from a Gentile to a Jew, then Moses is taught in every city as stated.

              If not for verses like in 1 Corinthians 7 I might be inclined to agree with you on the need for full conversion and observance, but even modern Judaism doesn't require it for Gentiles turned to God, and the NT is pretty clear that early Christian Jews didn't either.

              Comment


              • #37
                As for Noahide I'm not necessarily promoting it or saying that it exactly duplicates anything in the NT, but I'm countering the common argument that the NT and particularly Paul encourage Jews to abandon Torah in some kind of evil counterfeit Judaism. When in fact those complaints are often based on what is said to Gentiles, and when Judaism has similar teachings that don't compel Gentiles to fully convert to be Jews.
                I agree, but I don't think Paul ever encouraged Gentiles to abandon the Torah either.

                There's also no directive for men like Titus to "be circumcised and start observing Torah later, just hold off on it for now." In fact the following essentially mirrors Judaism in that Gentiles are actually discouraged from converting. I don't believe Judaism just came up with this attitude out of thin air, but that it was a view shared by Jews like those in Acts 15 vs. Judaizers who insisted on full conversion:

                1 Corinthians 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
                I agree that Paul discouraged Gentiles from becoming Jewish proselytes, but I disagree that meant they didn't need to follow God's instructions on how to live righteously. The topic of whether Gentile God-fearers should follow the Torah isn't ever questioned in the Bible and is taken as a given.

                But if you are called to convert from a Gentile to a Jew, then Moses is taught in every city as stated.
                I see no indication that Acts 15:21 was directed at only those Gentiles who were called to convert.

                If not for verses like in 1 Corinthians 7 I might be inclined to agree with you on the need for full conversion and observance, but even modern Judaism doesn't require it for Gentiles turned to God, and the NT is pretty clear that early Christian Jews didn't either.
                I haven't been saying that Gentiles should get circumcised or become Jews and nowhere in the Bible does it say that all Gentiles should become circumcised. This is copied from a post I revised this earlier:

                Acts 15:1 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.

                The key to understanding Acts 15 is to consider its Jewish context. Up until Acts 10, everyone who was a follower of Jesus was either Jewish or a convert to Judaism. It was commonly believed, even by Peter, that you had to become Jews and part of the nation of Israel in order to be part of the Kingdom of Heaven because it was only those were circumcised who had the power of God come upon them. However, it’s important to note that there are only two times in the Torah when Gentiles were required to become circumcised:

                Genesis 12:48 If a stranger shall sojourn with you and would keep the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised. Then he may come near and keep it; he shall be as a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person shall eat of it.

                Genesis 17:12-14 He who is eight days old among you shall be circumcised. Every male throughout your generations, whether born in your house or bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring, 13 both he who is born in your house and he who is bought with your money, shall surely be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

                The Torah never commanded all Gentiles to become circumcised and never gave a process for how Gentiles were to become proselytes, so when the Jerusalem Council ruled against circumcision being required for all Gentiles, they were not ruling against the Torah, but again man’s opinion about how the Torah should be kept. In fact, the Jerusalem Council had no authority to add to or subtract from the Torah, but could only interpret it to make binding decisions as to what they thought God meant.

                Deuteronomy 4:2 You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you.

                Even within Judaism, there was no shortage of opinions about what makes a proper proselyte:

                Yebamot 46a Our Rabbis taught: ‘If a proselyte was circumcised but had not performed the prescribed ritual immersion, R. Eliezer said, ‘Behold he is a proper proselyte; for so we find that our forefathers were circumcised and had not performed ritual immersion.’ If he performed the prescribed immersion but had not been circumcised, R. Joshua said, ‘Behold he is a proper proselyte; for so we find that the mothers had performed ritual immersion but had not been circumcised.’ The Sages, however, said, ‘Whether he had performed ritual immersion but had not been circumcised or whether he had been circumcised but had not performed the prescribed ritual immersion, he is not a proper proselyte, unless he has been circumcised and has also performed the prescribed ritual immersion.’

                So in Acts 15, some were arguing that Gentiles had to be circumcised and immersed before they could have fellowship with them and Paul was saying that they only had to be immersed. However, the issue wasn’t just about circumcision in particular, but about following all of the customs of the Jews living in the land of Israel, which Jesus referred to a heavy burden in Matthew 23:4: They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear,[a] and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger.

                This is also what is being talked about in Acts 15:10: Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?

                A yoke is a rabbinic term that meant a rabbi’s interpretation of the way the Torah should be kept, so when Jesus said that his yoke is easy and his burden is light, he was talking about his interpretation of the Torah. The Greek words “paradosis” means “Jewish traditionary law”, so Paul also taught traditions to Gentiles for how the Torah should be kept:

                1 Corinthians 11:2 Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you.

                2 Thessalonians 2:15 So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter

                2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.

                Jewish traditions were also known as oral law because they were passed down orally until the 2nd century when it was written down and became known as the Mishna. These traditions governed the way in which the Torah was supposed to be kept and Jews gave reverence to them equal to that of the Torah. For instance, Exodus 12:9 concerning the Passover lamb says: Do not eat any of it raw or boiled in water, but roasted, its head with its legs and its inner parts. So Jews created traditions that explained how this was supposed to be done.

                MISHNA: How should the paschal lamb be roasted? A spit made of the wood of the pomegranate-tree should be taken, put in at the mouth (of the lamb or kid), and brought out again at the vent thereof. Its legs and entrails should be placed inside, according to R. Jose the Galilean; but R. Aqiba said: This would be a kind of boiling, and for that reason they ought to be suspended on the outside (of the lamb). The paschal sacrifice must not be roasted on an iron roasting spit, nor on a gridiron. Zadok related that Rabbon Gamaliel once said to his bondsman Tabbi: “Go and roast for us the paschal sacrifice on a gridiron.”

                (Continued instructions: http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/t03/psc11.htm)
                (These traditions had the lamb look like it was crucified, so they teach about the Messiah.)

                The oral law also contained fences around the Torah, which keep you from breaking the commands of God. For example, Deuteronomy 14:21b For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. “You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk. So the rabbis took this command and said what it really meant was that you shouldn’t eat meat and milk together. Then along came another rabbi, who pointed out that if you ate cheese for lunch and a meat dish for supper, but the plates weren’t washed thoroughly and there was still some cheese clung to the plate, then the commandment would be broken because they would be mixed together. This led to creating a second fence that said that you should have two sets of dishes. Along comes another rabbi, who pointed out that if you store meat and milk in the same refrigerator and the milk spills on to the meat, then it would break the command, so they created a third fence that required two refrigerators. This could go on and on until in order to have a Kosher restaurant, you had to choose between serving either meat or milk.

                Jesus kept traditions, such as when he wore tassels or celebrated Hanukkah, and he was putting up a fence around adultery when he said not to even look at women lustfully. In the 1st century, there were many debates over the way the Torah should be kept and many rabbis taught their own set of traditions, with Hillel and Shammai being two of the major schools of thought (The group bringing the objection in Acts 15:1 were likely followers of Shammai). Many of the traditions were good or mundane, but when they conflicted with keeping the Torah itself and the Pharisees gave precedence to their own traditions, that became the greatest source of conflict between them and Jesus:

                Mark 7:6-8 And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,

                “‘This people honors me with their lips,
                but their heart is far from me;
                7 in vain do they worship me,
                teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’
                8 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.”

                So what is being discussed in Acts 15 is not whether Gentiles should follow the commandments of God, but whether they needed to become Jews and follow the traditions of men in order to be saved.
                "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

                Comment


                • #38
                  "Nor do people put new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the wineskins burst, and the wine pours out and the wineskins are ruined; but they put new wine into fresh wineskins, and both are preserved." (Matt. 9:17).

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

                  Now the Scribes and Pharisees may be signified by these old bottles, being natural men, no other than as they were born; having never been regenerated, and renewed in the spirit of their minds; in whom the old man was predominant, were mere formal professors of religion, and self-righteous persons: and by "new wine" is meant, either the love and favour of God compared to wine, that is neat and clean, because free from hypocrisy in him, or motives in the creature; to generous wine, for its cheering and reviving effects; and to new wine, not but that it is very ancient, even from everlasting, but, because newly manifested, in the effectual calling and conversion: or the Gospel is signified by wine, for its purity, good flavour, and pleasant taste; for its generous effects, in reviving drooping spirits, refreshing weary persons, and comforting distressed minds; and by new wine, not that it is a new doctrine, an upstart notion, for it is an ancient Gospel, but because newly and more clearly revealed by Christ and his apostles: or the blessings of grace which spring from the love of God, and are manifested in the Gospel, such as pardon of sin, reconciliation and atonement, justifying and sanctifying grace, spiritual joy and peace, and the like. Now as the new wine is not put into old bottles,

                  else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: so the love of God, the Gospel of the grace of God, and the blessings of it, are not received and retained, nor can they be, by natural men, by self-righteous persons: they do not suit and agree with their old carnal hearts and principles; they slight and reject them, and let them run out, which proves their greater condemnation.

                  But they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved. By "new bottles" are meant sinners, whom Christ calls by his grace, and the Spirit regenerates and renews, who are made new creatures in Christ; who have new hearts, and new spirits, and new principles of light, life, love, faith, and holiness, implanted in them; who have new eyes to see with, new ears to hear with, new feet to walk with, to and in Christ, new hands to work and handle with, and who live a new life and conversation. Now to such as these, the love of God is manifested and shed abroad in their hearts; by these, the Gospel of Christ is truly received and valued, and these enjoy the spiritual blessings of it; and so both the doctrine of the Gospel, and the grace of God, are preserved entire, and these persons saved in the day of Christ.

                  ----------------------------------------- Gill's exposition of the entire Bible: http://biblehub.com/matthew/9-17.htm

                  Just felt inspired to paste that here for some reason.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Soyeong: I agree with your description of Oral Law and how Jesus criticized endless additions to it.

                    But as you mentioned Deuteronomy 4:2 in not adding or subtracting from the Law: it seems that a position of for example saying that even Gentiles must observe all Torah does 2 things especially regarding Leviticus when commands are given to Jews as the children of Israel:

                    1. It adds Gentiles to Jews to whom commands are given.

                    2. It subtracts the command for circumcision in Leviticus 12.

                    In other words it arbitrarily says to Gentiles, you need to observe all commands except this one. Where it is that the following also makes clear that the need to observe all commands hinges on circumcision:

                    Galations 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

                    And conversely it would seem that every man who is not circumcised is not a debtor to do the whole Law.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I can link you one better:

                      In short, two problems with that interpretation is that Luke 5:39 says that they will say the old is better and it doesn't fit the context of Jesus gathering his disciples and being criticized for his selection. By looking at a Pharisaic proverb Avot 4:20 and matching the symbolism to Jesus parable, we get a much better interpretation.

                      "No one takes a lesson meant for a new student and tries to teach it to an old (already educated) student. If he does, he will fail to teach the new student, and the lesson meant for the new student will be rejected by the old student.

                      No one teaches new Torah-teaching to old (previously educated) students. If he does, the new teaching will be rejected, the student will be lost. No. Instead new Torah-teaching must be taught to new students. And no one after receiving old teaching (previous education) wants the new, for he says, "The old teaching is better.""

                      Luke 5:33 And they said to him, “The disciples of John fast often and offer prayers, and so do the disciples of the Pharisees, but yours eat and drink.”

                      After being criticized for the behavior of his disciples, Jesus essentially responds by saying that you can't teach an old dog new tricks.
                      "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Although Paul was an old dog Pharisee wanting to kill Christians, until he was called to be in a new skin.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          It's more general principle than an exact rule. Sometimes they can be taught new tricks, but you need to knock them off their horse to get their attention. :P
                          "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by JohnnyP View Post
                            Although Paul was an old dog Pharisee wanting to kill Christians, until he was called to be in a new skin.
                            Amen, my friend. Paul's own autobiographical sketch of his former life in Judaism compared to his life in Christ is absolutely stunning - Phil.3:2-11:

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

                            Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision; for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh, although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.

                            But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.

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

                            Wait, wait Paul's "former life in Judaism" - correct - "For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it." (Gal. 1:13).

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              But as you mentioned Deuteronomy 4:2 in not adding or subtracting from the Law: it seems that a position of for example saying that even Gentiles must observe all Torah does 2 things especially regarding Leviticus when commands are given to Jews as the children of Israel:
                              Even when the Torah was originally written, not everyone was supposed to follow all of the laws. Some were for the King, High priest, priests, judges, Israelites living in the land, strangers living among them, and to everyone. For instance, the Noahide laws were considered to be incumbent on all mankind to keep. Other laws Gentiles were required to keep:

                              Exodus 20:10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates.

                              Aliens living among them were required to keep the Sabbath.

                              Exodus 12:18-20 In the first month, from the fourteenth day of the month at evening, you shall eat unleavened bread until the twenty-first day of the month at evening. 19 For seven days no leaven is to be found in your houses. If anyone eats what is leavened, that person will be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether he is a sojourner or a native of the land. 20 You shall eat nothing leavened; in all your dwelling places you shall eat unleavened bread.”

                              In other words, aliens were responsible for keeping the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Did they keep that feast the 1st century? They sure did:

                              1 Corinthians 5:6-8 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?7 Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

                              Leviticus 16:29 “And it shall be a statute to you forever that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall afflict yourselves[b] and shall do no work, either the native or the stranger who sojourns among you.

                              The seventh month on the tenth day is more commonly known as Yom Kippur.

                              Leviticus 17:12 Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood.

                              Leviticus 17:15 And every person who eats what dies of itself or what is torn by beasts, whether he is a native or a sojourner, shall wash his clothes and bathe himself in water and be unclean until the evening; then he shall be clean. 16 But if he does not wash them or bathe his flesh, he shall bear his iniquity.”

                              This is not a complete list of what the 1st century believer would have been taught to do. They would have also been taught the traditions for how to carry out these things, such as how to make meat kosher.

                              In other words it arbitrarily says to Gentiles, you need to observe all commands except this one.
                              They could not add or subtract from the Torah, but they could interpret whether they thought it was something that God intended Gentiles to do.

                              Where it is that the following also makes clear that the need to observe all commands hinges on circumcision:

                              Galations 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

                              And conversely it would seem that every man who is not circumcised is not a debtor to do the whole Law.
                              Galatians 5:4-5 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified[a] by the law; you have fallen away from grace. 5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness.

                              What Paul is speaking against are those who were trying to become justified and saved through circumcision rather than by grace through faith. It's not that circumcision itself is bad, but that reasons for doing it can be bad. If you are trying to legalistically become justified through keeping the law, then you need to keep all of it, but if you're trying to follow the law because obedience to God's instructions is the fruit of sanctification and it is a delight to obey Him, then you are doing it for the right reasons.

                              Ephesians 2:8-10 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

                              We are save by grace through faith, but it is for the purpose of being obedient to God's instructions.

                              Romans 9:30-32 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness[d] did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works.

                              The problem wasn't that they were pursuing the law, but that they were pursuing it in the wrong way. If you don't understand that much of the discussion about the law is about the way in which it is followed and that Jesus said he came to teach us the right way to understand and follow the law, then you're going to miss much of what they are saying.
                              "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Oh another great verse that helps provide clarification in these types of discussions would be 1Cor. 9:20-21:

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

                                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; to those who are without 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.

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

                                Huh? Law of Christ? Yup - "Bear one another's burdens, and thereby fulfill the law of Christ". (Gal. 6:2).

                                Take care friends.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X