probably the greatest weakness of Hebrew Roots

[eternally-gratefull]

The crux of the conversation should shift to what faithful obedience for the saved believer looks like, since this is where our primary disagreement lies. From what I can tell from this and other threads, I've noticed at least three ways of thinking (though there are more out there):

Blessings to you all.

What does obedience look like in the saved.

1. The ten commandments. plus all the the ceremonial traditions, plus the many others laws given by moses.

2. Or as Jesus himself said, Matt 22:
[SUP]37 [/SUP]Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’[SUP][a][/SUP] [SUP]38 [/SUP]This is the first and great commandment. [SUP]39 [/SUP]And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’[SUP][b][/SUP] [SUP]40 [/SUP]On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”



I would say the answer is number 2. Not number 1. A person who observes number 1 may look religious, sound religious, and act religious. But that does not make him a righteous person at all. The pharisee proved this (and they even added a whole bunch of laws to make sure they did not break the few God already gave)

This is the issue people have with HRM's, It is not that we are judging them as not saved, it is that we are saying, there is a better way to sanctification, than to keep following ryules and regulation, a yoke the NT said the jews could not even keep. It is asking to much, and putting way to much emphasis on self. and not God.

 

[MacBestus]

wow dude.. You have issues.

What are you talking about?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

What are you talking about?

well lets see, first you mocked him, Then you called him a girl "sister" when it is obvious by his blue color he is a male..

 

[MacBestus]

well lets see, first you mocked him, Then you called him a girl "sister" when it is obvious by his blue color he is a male..

The mocking comment cuts both ways. But i do not have this color feature on my phone. I was under the impression it was a woman I was speaking to. No offense meant.

Was the mocking rebuke directed only at me? Or us both? I for one apologize for any offense.

 

[MacBestus]

well lets see, first you mocked him, Then you called him a girl "sister" when it is obvious by his blue color he is a male..

Having gone back to reread my offensive comment. The party said I had a lot to apologize for. I asked how I offended them....where is the mockery? If anything the comment i responded to was a mockery. Please explain how I mocked so I tender no offense again.

 

[garee]

You quoted not one verse to deny the verses I quoted. That means you are sharing opinion instead of rightly dividing scripture. You will forgive me if I choose to believe scripture over "garee from the internet." especially in violation of basic Christian understanding. There is not a single Christian sect who does not believe the high priesthood our Messiah inherits is the Melchizedek high priesthood. It is said in too many places in Scripture to pull it off. You are inventing theology in an attempt to disprove the bible. Even Wikipedia would be a better source than that.

No one is denying verses. Offering my private interpretation as a opinion is not denying.Its giving a personal interpretation.The same as yourself.

Melchizedek was a theophany. The Son of God remains a priest continually without beginning or end. Melchizedek typifies the Son of God as a shadow. We don’t inherit from shadows.

Just curious but to what time period do you think the first century reformation was restored to?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Having gone back to reread my offensive comment. The party said I had a lot to apologize for. I asked how I offended them....where is the mockery? If anything the comment i responded to was a mockery. Please explain how I mocked so I tender no offense again.

I apologize for interrupting a private conversation by pointing out your simple red herring response.

sorry if you do not think so. But that was pretty mocking.. then to call him a lady.. Well if you can not see a color, I guess that explains it, Forgive me there..

do you have anything to say about the other Comments I have made on this subject matter..

 

[sparty-g]

Congratulations on your new blessing. May the eyes of the father rest on him always. May the love of Messiah hold him when he needs strength. May the love and favor that flow from the Father and the Son guide his path forever.

Amen

Mazzel Tov

Thank you. He's a joy and blessing in our lives.

 

[Dan_473]

Just popped on in to CC after a much needed hiatus for the birth of our firstborn son.

welcome back, sparty-g, and congradulations!

 

[sparty-g]

yes, I agree that the Torah-commands of God are valuable and applicable to our lives. I think it's probably how they apply that we might see things differently.

Hi Dan. That's a start. I honestly can't remember from our previous exchanges where you aligned on the topic. I remember you being curious and inquisitive, but I also thought I remember you making your cases against Torah command observances.

I'm not confident that we actually agree on "Torah/Law theory" (theological perspective). I would argue that our fundamental differences in "Torah/Law practice" (application details) perhaps derive from a difference in theory. E.g., on the dietary restrictions -- if I don't eat the meat of unclean animals, and you do, then it's not simply a difference of application (how to apply it); it's a difference of theory (whether or not it applies). We Torah-observant folks believe in actually keeping the commands (this is the application part), not finding ways to avoid keeping them by making cases for Messianic fulfillment, annulment, etc. Non-Torah-observant folks do not believe the Torah commands are applicable, so there is no attempt to study them to learn how to apply them. So, if you eat unclean meats and I do not, then it's not a difference in application, it's a difference in theory. If our theory was the same, then we would at least find commonality on the most basic application of these Torah commands: do not eat them. But our theories differ, so even the most basic application differs. We Torah-observant folks are including study and application of the Torah commands of God in order to walk as our Messiah walked. If a person does not even practice the most basic application of the dietary commands, then that person is instead trying to avoid actually keeping the command by arguing for its non-application by Messianic fulfillment, annulment, etc. -- and they are not walking as the Messiah walked.

In sum, a person can't claim to be keeping a command by not keeping it. And if a person who thinks the Torah-commands are applicable to our lives ends up using the same arguments that non-Torah-observant folks use to avoid keeping them, then that person doesn't actually think they are applicable -- it is then not an issue of how they apply (which is practice), but whether or not they apply (which now goes back to theory). If it were about how they apply, then we would both be avoiding putting bacon or shrimp in our mouths and we would be talking about further application details like buying meat from a kosher market versus the average super market, eating out at restaurants where clean meat may have touched unclean meat or been prepared using unclean utensils, etc. We would have a basic agreement that we are not to physically eat them (which is the most fundamental understanding of the commands) and then would need to prayerfully study and discuss about the lengths to which we further go to keep the commands. And that last part is where Torah-observant folks differ in their practice.

I know it's complex, which is probably my fault as I likely could have explained it more simply, but I hope you understand. And please don't take any of it personally -- I really don't know much about what you believe or how you live your life, so think of this as all a hypothetical comparison of two people, not specifically between you and me.

Blessings to you.

 

[Dan_473]

If we are followers of Messiah we follow his words and the teachings of his disciples.

Yes!

Now... you wrote
'I believe that many of the details of Law observance were worked out in their public meetings as well as in the synagogues'

What is it you feel was worked out?

 

[sparty-g]

welcome back, sparty-g, and congradulations!

Thanks Dan! The boy is 5 months old and hanging off my chest in a carrier as I type now! (It's my day off work for daddy duties). Hope you've been blessed.

 

[Dan_473]

Hi Dan. That's a start. I honestly can't remember from our previous exchanges where you aligned on the topic. I remember you being curious and inquisitive, but I also thought I remember you making your cases against Torah command observances.

I'm not confident that we actually agree on "Torah/Law theory" (theological perspective). I would argue that our fundamental differences in "Torah/Law practice" (application details) perhaps derive from a difference in theory. E.g., on the dietary restrictions -- if I don't eat the meat of unclean animals, and you do, then it's not simply a difference of application (how to apply it); it's a difference of theory (whether or not it applies). We Torah-observant folks believe in actually keeping the commands (this is the application part), not finding ways to avoid keeping them by making cases for Messianic fulfillment, annulment, etc. Non-Torah-observant folks do not believe the Torah commands are applicable, so there is no attempt to study them to learn how to apply them. So, if you eat unclean meats and I do not, then it's not a difference in application, it's a difference in theory. If our theory was the same, then we would at least find commonality on the most basic application of these Torah commands: do not eat them. But our theories differ, so even the most basic application differs. We Torah-observant folks are including study and application of the Torah commands of God in order to walk as our Messiah walked. If a person does not even practice the most basic application of the dietary commands, then that person is instead trying to avoid actually keeping the command by arguing for its non-application by Messianic fulfillment, annulment, etc. -- and they are not walking as the Messiah walked.

In sum, a person can't claim to be keeping a command by not keeping it. And if a person who thinks the Torah-commands are applicable to our lives ends up using the same arguments that non-Torah-observant folks use to avoid keeping them, then that person doesn't actually think they are applicable -- it is then not an issue of how they apply (which is practice), but whether or not they apply (which now goes back to theory). If it were about how they apply, then we would both be avoiding putting bacon or shrimp in our mouths and we would be talking about further application details like buying meat from a kosher market versus the average super market, eating out at restaurants where clean meat may have touched unclean meat or been prepared using unclean utensils, etc. We would have a basic agreement that we are not to physically eat them (which is the most fundamental understanding of the commands) and then would need to prayerfully study and discuss about the lengths to which we further go to keep the commands. And that last part is where Torah-observant folks differ in their practice.

I know it's complex, which is probably my fault as I likely could have explained it more simply, but I hope you understand. And please don't take any of it personally -- I really don't know much about what you believe or how you live your life, so think of this as all a hypothetical comparison of two people, not specifically between you and me.

Blessings to you.

suppose two people are walking together.
they both claim to keep the law.
can one of them act as judge of the other,
to say that they aren't keeping the law?

 

[sparty-g]

What does obedience look like in the saved.

1. The ten commandments. plus all the the ceremonial traditions, plus the many others laws given by moses.

2. Or as Jesus himself said, Matt 22:
[SUP]37 [/SUP]Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’[SUP][a][/SUP] [SUP]38 [/SUP]This is the first and great commandment. [SUP]39 [/SUP]And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’[SUP][b][/SUP] [SUP]40 [/SUP]On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”



I would say the answer is number 2. Not number 1. A person who observes number 1 may look religious, sound religious, and act religious. But that does not make him a righteous person at all. The pharisee proved this (and they even added a whole bunch of laws to make sure they did not break the few God already gave)

This is the issue people have with HRM's, It is not that we are judging them as not saved, it is that we are saying, there is a better way to sanctification, than to keep following ryules and regulation, a yoke the NT said the jews could not even keep. It is asking to much, and putting way to much emphasis on self. and not God.

Thanks for your input. I would say both 1) and 2) should factor into a believer's life. It's simple -- believers should walk as the Messiah walked. To live out the will of God, the Messiah's walk included properly observing the Torah commands of His Father. As followers of the Messiah, our walk should include the same.

Regarding 2), this is a distillation of the Torah commands, not a replacement of them. The question asked of Him is which are the greatest two, not which are the only two. The idea is that if you have that pure and joyful love of God and your neighbor, then you will live your life in relationship with those two (God and neighbors) according to God's will, which is expressed in the Torah commands, among other sources throughout the history of God's interaction with mankind as recorded in the Scriptures. He gave commands about how to relate to Him and commands about how to relate to our neighbors, revealed through Moses and elsewhere, and if we love Him and our neighbors (God first, by the way, notice the order He gives these two distilled commands), then we will be Spiritually led to walk in the ways He has given for us. I recommend not over-spiritualizing things -- there is a written Word with commands enumerated for a reason; it's not an inherently bad thing. The NT is full of commands; no need to hate lists. If one hates lists, then that person might as well toss out their Bible and just pray and seek the Spirit completely for guidance with no written reference. There is a practical, functional use for the written Word and the commands found preserved within it, and they serve as one of our guides while we still have physical bodies on this physical earth. The Messiah and His disciples loved the written Word and the commands found within, and we should as well.

And on your issue with HRM folks, while this may be your feeling, I believe it to be unfounded. Non-Torah-observant folks can also look, sound, and act religious while not actually being filled with or led by the Spirit -- it's not a problem of their inspirational source (whether it be Torah commands, NT writings, the Spirit, all of the above, etc.), but of the person. And has been posited by us Torah-observant folks in the past on this board, the problem with the Pharisees is not that they kept the Torah commands (as you posit), but that they did not keep the Torah commands, which is stated clearly by the Messiah (cf. Matt. 15, especially vs. 3, 6b, and 9): Following God's Torah commands didn't make them hypocrites -- for the Messiah and His disciples also followed them -- but forsaking God's Torah commands in favor of their man-made traditions did, and in Matt. 23:23 we read that they neglected the more important matters of the Torah/Law (justice, mercy, faithfulness -- which show they hadn't internalized the proper love for God and their neighbor) in favor of less weightier matters, while His directive for them is they should have practiced those weightier matters while also not neglecting the less weightier matters. Similar to the Messiah's distillation of the Torah commands above, the more important matters do not replace the less weightier matters, but the lesson is about a more comprehensive approach to the Torah commands and a proper alignment of values.

In sum, the Messiah's directive to them is not to put aside the Torah commands to achieve God's purpose for their lives in loving God and their neighbors, but instead to more comprehensively embrace them and not let their man-made traditions supplant God's Torah commands or let their pride and arrogance prevent them from reaching the goal. Likewise, I think your charge against HRM folks is unfounded. Our approach is not "follow rules for sanctification". While there may be some folks who put too much emphasis on this sort of "religious" activity, it's mostly that your perception of the rest of us is incorrect. We aim to live as God wills for us and to walk as Messiah walked. The Torah commands are a guide for this and to Messiah, for Messiah also walked in them, and the Holy Spirit also guides us. It's not the monster you make it out to be, and not the yoke mentioned in Scripture. The emphasis is always on God and what His grace empowers us to do.

Blessings to you on your journey.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Thanks for your input. I would say both 1) and 2) should factor into a believer's life. It's simple -- believers should walk as the Messiah walked. To live out the will of God, the Messiah's walk included properly observing the Torah commands of His Father. As followers of the Messiah, our walk should include the same.

Regarding 2), this is a distillation of the Torah commands, not a replacement of them. The question asked of Him is which are the greatest two, not which are the only two. The idea is that if you have that pure and joyful love of God and your neighbor, then you will live your life in relationship with those two (God and neighbors) according to God's will, which is expressed in the Torah commands, among other sources throughout the history of God's interaction with mankind as recorded in the Scriptures. He gave commands about how to relate to Him and commands about how to relate to our neighbors, revealed through Moses and elsewhere, and if we love Him and our neighbors (God first, by the way, notice the order He gives these two distilled commands), then we will be Spiritually led to walk in the ways He has given for us. I recommend not over-spiritualizing things -- there is a written Word with commands enumerated for a reason; it's not an inherently bad thing. The NT is full of commands; no need to hate lists. If one hates lists, then that person might as well toss out their Bible and just pray and seek the Spirit completely for guidance with no written reference. There is a practical, functional use for the written Word and the commands found preserved within it, and they serve as one of our guides while we still have physical bodies on this physical earth. The Messiah and His disciples loved the written Word and the commands found within, and we should as well.

And on your issue with HRM folks, while this may be your feeling, I believe it to be unfounded. Non-Torah-observant folks can also look, sound, and act religious while not actually being filled with or led by the Spirit -- it's not a problem of their inspirational source (whether it be Torah commands, NT writings, the Spirit, all of the above, etc.), but of the person. And has been posited by us Torah-observant folks in the past on this board, the problem with the Pharisees is not that they kept the Torah commands (as you posit), but that they did not keep the Torah commands, which is stated clearly by the Messiah (cf. Matt. 15, especially vs. 3, 6b, and 9): Following God's Torah commands didn't make them hypocrites -- for the Messiah and His disciples also followed them -- but forsaking God's Torah commands in favor of their man-made traditions did, and in Matt. 23:23 we read that they neglected the more important matters of the Torah/Law (justice, mercy, faithfulness -- which show they hadn't internalized the proper love for God and their neighbor) in favor of less weightier matters, while His directive for them is they should have practiced those weightier matters while also not neglecting the less weightier matters. Similar to the Messiah's distillation of the Torah commands above, the more important matters do not replace the less weightier matters, but the lesson is about a more comprehensive approach to the Torah commands and a proper alignment of values.

In sum, the Messiah's directive to them is not to put aside the Torah commands to achieve God's purpose for their lives in loving God and their neighbors, but instead to more comprehensively embrace them and not let their man-made traditions supplant God's Torah commands or let their pride and arrogance prevent them from reaching the goal. Likewise, I think your charge against HRM folks is unfounded. Our approach is not "follow rules for sanctification". While there may be some folks who put too much emphasis on this sort of "religious" activity, it's mostly that your perception of the rest of us is incorrect. We aim to live as God wills for us and to walk as Messiah walked. The Torah commands are a guide for this and to Messiah, for Messiah also walked in them, and the Holy Spirit also guides us. It's not the monster you make it out to be, and not the yoke mentioned in Scripture. The emphasis is always on God and what His grace empowers us to do.

Blessings to you on your journey.

So I need to do both?

I thought Jesus said, if we do number 2. we will automatically do "what God actually commanded for us to do" in number 1.

The law that says do not commit adultry does not tell me do not look at a woman and cheat in our heads. So it can not keep me from sin, It can ONLY fool me into sinning, and thinking I am not in sin, because I am alright, I did not break the law (this is what the pharisee did)

I can obey the letter. and still fall short..

that is where number 2 comes in,, If I do number 2. I will not only not break the letter of the law. But the spirit of the law will not be broken either (I will not even think lustful thought, because those thought are SELF focused thoughts, which would NEVER happen if my focus is on loving others.

 

[Grandpa]

What does the word wicked mean in verse 17? Please take it back to the Greek.

Peter said Paul was hard to understand not me.

I don't know Greek.

But it should be evident that the error of the wicked is the opposite of the solution for the error of the wicked.


The error of the wicked is not growing in grace and not growing in the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.


Peter said that Paul is hard to understand for the unlearned and the unstable, probably because they are led away with the error of the wicked.

It more than likely all ties together, don't you think?

 

[sparty-g]

suppose two people are walking together.
they both claim to keep the law.
can one of them act as judge of the other,
to say that they aren't keeping the law?

Hi Dan. I'm not really in a position to give a substantive answer right now, but here are my thoughts: In most cases, it only takes common sense to tell whether or not someone is keeping a Torah command at least in some basic fundamental sense. E.g., a person is not keeping the command prohibiting adultery against one's spouse if that person is out there having physical sexual intercourse with other people. Either a person couldn't give a hoot less about the command and is out there committing adultery freely, or that person is refraining from adultery and keeping the command. If you know a brother or sister in Messiah who is having sex outside of their marriage, then it is your place to talk to them about it and attempt to help set them straight. And when two people at least agree that the command should be kept, and are avoiding the most basic fundamental (I would almost say "obvious") violations of the command, then those two can further discuss as brothers and sisters in Messiah about the further details of how to keep the command.

E.g., is it adultery if someone isn't physically having sex with another person, but perhaps watching pornography. Or if the person is simply looking at or thinking about another person in a lustful manner. The Messiah brought clarity to this specific matter by saying that looking at another person lustfully is, in fact, a form of adultery since it is adultery of the heart (cf. Matt. 5:27-28). His deeper ("spiritual"?) application of the command does not negate the physical in any sense -- He is simply saying that the inside of the cup must also be clean, as well as the outside. The Torah command still stands, and Messiah has brought a fuller meaning to it for us all to more properly live out God's will regarding that command. There is no instance where someone could commit the physical act of sex and not be violating the command, regardless of what they think is going on in their heart (e.g., lust-less or heartless sex, if there is such a thing? -- I would argue not). It's now up to us as brothers and sisters in Messiah to meditate on the Word (including the Torah command as originally given), consult the Holy Spirit, and discuss with each other about how to properly walk with regard to this instruction from God. E.g., maybe we shouldn't be having that intimate conversation with a co-worker of the opposite sex -- perhaps it crosses a line. The Scriptures often don't include this level of specificity, so we seek using the methods above, definitely avoiding physical sex (which is the most fundamental violation of God's instruction to not commit adultery), but also to stay on the right side of that line in accordance with God's will regarding matters of the heart.

I make the same case for dietary restrictions. As I previously said, there is a basic fundamental violation that should allow common sense to dictate whether or not someone cares about keeping the command: is a person physically eating the meat of unclean animals, like pork or shrimp? Particulars beyond what the Scriptures plainly state are for us to come to understand as we learn and grow. Discussion among brothers and sisters is among our options.

In sum, yes, I believe there is some level of basic fundamental practice that a brother or sister can call someone else out on. Then somewhere it crosses over into particulars that require more growth and understanding, which we are encouraged to pursue multiple times over in the Scriptures. If I walk into my Torah-observant congregation chomping on a piece of shrimp, then people there have every right to call me out on violating the command (assuming we agree that command should be kept). But beyond that, I and those in my circle have discussions about the various ways we live our lives in obedience to God's will behind that command. Some friends I have will eat gelatin, others will not (concerns about the animal source); some will eat out at restaurants, others will not (concerns about how the food is handled and prepared). One of us is right and the other wrong on these applications, but thankfully we have God's grace to forgive us where we make mistakes. The important thing to note, though, is that we are not lawless people, even if we are walking about the commands in less-than-perfect manners. The lawless person says to not even consider them; the lawful person considers them and works out the application details in their walk with Messiah, and is forgiven where they fall short.

 

[sparty-g]

So I need to do both?

I thought Jesus said, if we do number 2. we will automatically do "what God actually commanded for us to do" in number 1.

The law that says do not commit adultry does not tell me do not look at a woman and cheat in our heads. So it can not keep me from sin, It can ONLY fool me into sinning, and thinking I am not in sin, because I am alright, I did not break the law (this is what the pharisee did)

I can obey the letter. and still fall short..

that is where number 2 comes in,, If I do number 2. I will not only not break the letter of the law. But the spirit of the law will not be broken either (I will not even think lustful thought, because those thought are SELF focused thoughts, which would NEVER happen if my focus is on loving others.

See my response #417 to Dan where I use that very example of adultery. Yes, you need to do both (love God and your neighbor) and consult God's instructions revealed throughout the Scriptures, including what was revealed to Moses. It should be obvious that doing #2 does not automatically lead to doing #1 in practice -- if that were the case, we wouldn't have so many different denominations and divisions in the body of Messiah about theology, beliefs, practices, etc. I mean, we all claim to love God and our neighbor, right? The fact that we don't all share the same beliefs and practices is demonstrable evidence that it's not an automatic process and something is happening along the way to prevent us from getting there. It's the fact that we are still in physical bodies on this physical earth, and, in my opinion, that so many people ignore Torah. Like I said in a previous post, if there is no good purpose to the written directives of Scripture, then toss it out because, by that logic, having the "backstory of Jesus" or a "window into God's heart" or whatever the non-Torah-observant folk think is the value of Torah-commands is not even comparable to being led by the Holy Spirit.

On the adultery thing, the Torah-command isn't fooling you -- you're just fooling yourself. Hebrews makes it very clear that the fault is not with the Torah-commands, but with us people. There indeed was something at fault with the first covenant, and it was us people. Heb. 8:7-8 clearly says this, which is why a new covenant had to be made. This is why sin is stirred up within us because of the Torah-commands: there is something wrong with US. When you read that adultery command and trick yourself into thinking you're not in sin when you lustfully look at another woman, the problem is with you. But praise be to God that He sent His only Son to die on our behalf to forgive us of our sins and reconcile us back to God, and has given us His Holy Spirit as a guide to better walk in His ways and His grace to empower us to do so while overcoming sin!

So yes, you can obey only the letter and fall short, but you better not think for one second you can get away with violating that same letter and still be right with God, even if you think you're good intentioned in your heart. No, instead love God and your neighbor first and foremost, meditate on that Torah command and other Scriptures, seek the Holy Spirit's guidance, and consult brothers and sisters in the faith. In time, you'll grow to walk more fully aligned with God's will regarding that command and, ultimately, for your life. None of this negates including the Torah commands in your recourse, as the Messiah and His disciples did.

 

[Dan_473]

I don't know Greek.

But it should be evident that the error of the wicked is the opposite of the solution for the error of the wicked.


The error of the wicked is not growing in grace and not growing in the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.


Peter said that Paul is hard to understand for the unlearned and the unstable, probably because they are led away with the error of the wicked.

It more than likely all ties together, don't you think?

Greek can sometimes provide insights,
but in my experience,
the same doctrines are available in good translations.

the spirit can guide the beginning reader as well as the scholar.

 

[MacBestus]

sorry if you do not think so. But that was pretty mocking.. then to call him a lady.. Well if you can not see a color, I guess that explains it, Forgive me there..

do you have anything to say about the other Comments I have made on this subject matter..

Please refresh my memory