What Laws are still valid to christians

[Elin]

Mattithyah 15:2-3, "Why do Your disciples transgress the traditions of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat. But He answered, and said to them: And why do you transgress the Laws of Yahweh by your traditions?"

So clearly Yahshua is against these Pharisical laws in the Talmud. So why is it 8 chapters later He tells us to "do all they say?"

Something is not right here. I was always bothered by this verse, until the truth set me free.

Every translation reads as such, as all Greek texts read this way:

New International Version Mt 23:2-3
"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach."

King James Bible Mt 23:2-3

"Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not."

However Yahweh has left us truth!

Shem Tob's Hebrew Mattithyah
Mattithyah 23:2-3, "The Pharisees and Sages sit upon the seat of Mosheh. Therefore, all that he (Mosheh) says to you, diligently do, but according to thier takanot (reforms) and thier ma'asim (precedents) do not do, because they talk (Torah) but they do not do."

The NT was written in Greek.

This man's translation does not agree with the Greek of the NT.

Jesus was supporting the authority of the Pharisees, not because they were right,
but because they were the authorized successors of Moses as teachers of the law.

Just as Paul respected the authority of the High Priest, Ananias, whom Paul did not know
was the High Priest, when he ordered those standing near Paul to strike him on the mouth.
Paul called Ananias a whitewashed wall for being a hypocrite.

They told Paul that Anaias was the High Priest, and Paul repented of his comment.
(Ac 23:1-5)

There is no Biblical warrant for this Hebrew translation of Mt 23:2-3 which disagrees with its meaning in the original language, the Greek.

Then why do you follow the Greek,

Non-responsive.

Why would you not follow the language in which it was written rather than the language in which it was not written?

or is that just another Command that one doesnt care about?

"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you," (Mt 23:2)

You better go get you a vile Talmud and obey the rabbis then?????

Non-responsive.

I have my rabbi.

Sorry you do not agree with Rabbi Jesus and Paul in supporting established authority.

 

[just-me]

Originally Posted by just-me

The rhetorical question that we, as Christians,must answer for ourselves is, does the strength of the law expose the weakness of the flesh, or does the strength of the salvation expose the weakness of the law? One cannot have it both ways.

The strength of the flesh (law of sin) exposes the "weakness" of the law.

Let me see if I understand you right. The law is weak, and the strength of the flesh confirms that? Or are you saying that the law is exposed as weak (it always has been) because the flesh (law of sin) is strong?

 

[homwardbound]

Why is that you and others cannot answer a simple question simply? Paul made it very clear that if one becomes physically circumcised as a means of obedience to law, he has cut himself off from Christ.

you just said clear as a bell, it is what ones motive is that cuts one off, is it flesh worship or Spiritual worship? God is the one that knows what the intentions of each person is, and will reward accordingly. God leads, flesh does not, only does if one chooses to not be dead to flesh sin nature, that simple!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Elin]

Then why dont you follow the Greek, and obey the command of the Pharisees? Or is that just another Command that one doesnt care about?

"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you"

""Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do"

You better go get you a vile Talmud and obey the rabbis then?????

I do follow the Greek.

I am no longer under the OT rabbi.

I obey the NT Rabbi Jesus.

 

[homwardbound]

And once again you have demonstrated that you are unable (or unwilling) to answer the simple question. Moses or Paul? It is impossible to obey both regarding physical circumcision. IMO you are afraid of openly admitting that you don't believe Paul's authority.

Is not their only one mediator between God and Man, Jesus Christ. Is Paul anything, Peter, Abraham, Noah, Moses, are any of the Patriarchs. Whom!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! again all one day will be judged by the intention to what they have done or not done

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So when you quoted me on Post #1507 why did you leave out your original question that I quoted form an earlier post that you quote back to me? Ask me again what I would think instead of what they would think and I'll give you an answer. Let me help you. You asked

Originally Posted by eternally-gratefull

The question should be.

If a 25 y/o male came into their church. And his parents did not circumcize them. And he was circumcized by the hands of God in his heart. would they try to force him to be physically circumcised. And would they consider him to be in sin if he did not. and make it a yes or no answer.

Now I will ask the question correctly and give you an answer.

Originally Posted by eternally-gratefull

The question should be.

If a 25 y/o male came into their church. And his parents did not circumcize them. And he was circumcized by the hands of God in his heart. would you try to force him to be physically circumcised. And would you consider him to be in sin if he did not. and make it a yes or no answer.

See what I mean by trying to distract and shift?

My post was not directed to you. it was directed to someone else. I said, maybe HE SHOULD ask this question.

Again lets restate it..

If a 25 y/o male came into their (Just-me, Hizykia, John or anyone else) church. And his parents did not circumcize them. And he was circumcized by the hands of God in his heart. would they (just me, Hizykia, john or anyon else) try to force him to be physically circumcised. And would they (Just-me, Hizykia, john or anyone else) consider him to be in sin if he did not. and make it a yes or no answer.

So according to this. The question (if going to be answered by you) should have been interpreted by you as...

If a 25 y/o male came into Just-me's church. And his parents did not circumcize them. And he was circumcized by the hands of God in his heart. would just me try to force him to be physically circumcised. And would Just-me, consider him to be in sin if he did not. and make it a yes or no answer.

And your saying I ASKED the question wrong??

Would I force him to be circumcised? No
And would I consider him to be in sin if he would not? No

YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! After all morning of going back and forth, we finally got that answer which would have.

1. Stopped HeRoseFromTheDead from asking you the same question over and over
2. Stopped me from trying to verify what you were saying, because all I could do is assume I knew what you meant. But again, in here, we find most of the time we do this, we are wrong
3. Got myself and hopefully a few others to say AMEN brother.
4. Pray you would join us in showing those who would answer YES to both of those questions the reason it is not so.. so we could all come to a unity of faith.

Not hard to answer the question if you know how to ask a question.

Not a hard question to answer, if you actually read the question. because it was asked the correct way, you just misinterpreted it.

So your analogy of me is that people can't talk to me because of the way I answer questions. I think it has a lot to do with leading questions, or questions not properly asked, for whatever reason. I think I see through it though. It's pretty obvious.

what I see is a man who for some reason is afraid. who cares if a person asked a leading question. It may be for different reasons.

A person honestly wants to no a specific answer, so he understands
A person is leading you to answer even though he already knows it
a person is leading you to stomp on you when you answer.

if our faith is sure, and we are secure in our faiht. Non of these would matter, Just answer the question. And stop being so vague.. Jesus was not vague, even when he was asked leading questions by the pharisees. he just came out and told what he believed. then explianed his answer

Not everyone is out to get you. And even if they were. if your secure in your faiht it would not matter. Your doing what you do makes people wonder. and causes confusion. Like it did here today.

So when I said I would reject the church, you might think that I meant "I would reject the church which did NOT do this" after you said that they were doing this?

I never said they were doing this. Yet again, you did not read my question.

I ended the question by saying; make it a yes or no answer.

so how can this be interpreted as saying they DID this??

It's a ridiculous question when I was talking the circumcision of the heart, which you also stated in your question.

I used it as a reference point, Not as part of the question I did not want answered. To get to the bottom of the question.

Of course if they were not spiritual circumcized. the question would not matter, now would it?

I made it very clear before you asked your question that the total essence of circumcision was a Spiritual one. So if I am saying that the circumcision of the heart is where God wants us to be according to His law, why would ask about the fleshly things under these circumstances if it wasn't to divert the truth about what was being said? Seems as though you people that want to throw away parts of the Bible are always concentrating on fleshly rhetoric so you can condemn it.

Because. God did not say to abraham, or the law. Have a baby who is 8 days old get spiritually circumcized. he said have them physically circumcised.

We see people in the NT and even in todays church say if a man is not physically circumcised, they are breaking the law. The question origionally asked you, is what would you do? believe moses (physical circumcision) or believe Paul (physical circumcision avails nothing) and you went to spiritual? Why? that was not the topic of the question. When you did this, all it did was make most people feal you were diverting the question, because you were afraid to answer..

If the topic was spiritual circumcision, your answer would have been fine. But since it was NOT CONCERNING THAT ALL, your answer was vague, and as erin would say, unresponsive.

 

[homwardbound]

Moses is not Yahshua.

Neither is Paul

 

[Elin]

If you look into the evidence theat the Hebrew version is more original in content it is very compelling. There are a few critical errors in the Greek that are not in the Hebrew. So it is certianly worth looking into, but know that all translations of it are not equal.

The critical errors are in the Hebrew, which is not the original language of the NT,
and where the alteration takes place.

 

[homwardbound]

The question should be.

If a 25 y/o male came into their church. And his parents did not circumcize them. And he was circumcized by the hands of God in his heart. would they try to force him to be physically circumcised. And would they consider him to be in sin if he did not. and make it a yes or no answer.

Me for me I say no!!!!!!!!!!! but others say yes, Are both right? Who does the increase, God or man?

 

[Elin]

No. That would mean the person is saved by the law. I thought you said you did not believe this? if a person is saved and did not obey, they would suffer whatever physical or emotional causal effect of breaking that law. Which would not be very good. And they would suffer the chastening of the Lord. Which is not pleasant at all.

But they would not be kicked out of the family.



He is doing far much more than this.

he is sinning against his own Body
He is sinning against his wife.
He is sinning against the woman he commited the sin with, and not respecting her or the Body God gave her
He is sinning against her spouse if she is married.
He is risking the breakdown of his own marraige, Which believe me, is painful. Expecially if you have kids.

thus he is sinning against his own kids.

And more importantly, he has sinned against God.

Yes, and for the born again child of God it is all forgiven by confession and repentance (1Jn 1:9).

He does not lose his place in the elect family of God.

 

[Elin]

The rhetorical question that we, as Christians,must answer for ourselves is, does the strength of the law expose the weakness of the flesh, or does the strength of the salvation expose the weakness of the law? One cannot have it both ways.

The strength of the flesh (law of sin) exposes the "weakness" of the law.

Let me see if I understand you right. The law is weak, and the strength of the flesh confirms that? Or are you saying that the law is exposed as weak (it always has been) because the flesh (law of sin) is strong?

For making righteous, the law of sin overcomes the Mosaic law preventing anyone from being made righteous by the Mosaic law.

 

[just-me]

If the topic was spiritual circumcision, your answer would have been fine. But since it was NOT CONCERNING THAT ALL, your answer was vague, and as erin would say, unresponsive.

It is always suppose to be Spiritual when discussing the Word of God. I could care less about the fleshly right and wrongs that don’t involve the motivation of the rights and wrongs. I submit that if you ask a question, I will answer it as best as I can, but not in fleshly terms. To do otherwise would be like the gun debate, and if I agreed that guns should be banished, I would say, “let all the murders go free and put the guns in jail, for hang them, stone them, whatever it takes.”

To be truthful I would answer any question concerning that topic with another question to avoid ridiculous rhetoric. I would ask, “Would any of you politicians consider what motivates the finger to pull the trigger? In other words, the physical aspect of murder is not the cure to the problem; it’s what motivates those actions that are the problem. I want to think about motivation (Spirit) rather than physical. Treating the disease instead of the symptoms is the cure.

 

[Josh321]

ask yourself this question if we were meant to follow the mosiac law why is there a new testament? and why did christ die for us? think about that.

 

[homwardbound]

I would disagree.

the law is weak.

It can not save you as a non believer
It can not make you righteous as a believer.

Thus it is weak in what people want it to do.

It is ONLY strong in what it was intended. A schoolmaster.

eternally-grateful, it matters not which way you slice, dice and or cube. The Law all Law from God is perfect in and of itself. It is the flesh that is weak
[h=3]Romans 7:10-14[/h]Living Bible (TLB)

[SUP]10 [/SUP]So as far as I was concerned, the good law which was supposed to show me the way of life resulted instead in my being given the death penalty. [SUP]11[/SUP]Sin fooled me by taking the good laws of God and using them to make me guilty of death. [SUP]12 [/SUP]But still, you see, the law itself was wholly right and good.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]But how can that be? Didn’t the law cause my doom? How then can it be good? No, it was sin, devilish stuff that it is, that used what was good to bring about my condemnation. So you can see how cunning and deadly and damnable it is. For it uses God’s good laws for its own evil purposes.

[SUP]14 [/SUP]The law is good, then, and the trouble is not there but with me because I am sold into slavery with Sin as my owner.


[h=3]Romans 7:10-14[/h]Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)

[SUP]10 [/SUP]And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. [SUP]11 [/SUP]For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me. [SUP]12 [/SUP]Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. [SUP]14 [/SUP]For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

 

[homwardbound]

I would disagree.

the law is weak.

It can not save you as a non believer
It can not make you righteous as a believer.

Thus it is weak in what people want it to do.

It is ONLY strong in what it was intended. A schoolmaster.

Is flesh weak?

 

[just-me]

For making righteous, the law of sin overcomes the Mosaic law preventing anyone from being made righteous by the Mosaic law.

I would say it different................. For to be righteous, the law of God exposes the law of sin and death, preventing anyone from being made righteous by the Mosaic law, which is given to us by God.

I would add that this condition that is exposed, gives us a sincere desire to be free from this death, and grasp on to the hand (Christ Jesus) that can deliver us from this certain death.

 

[cfultz3]

The bible addresses not only the spiritual but also the flesh in this matter.

1 Corinthians 6:20 For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's.

Galatians 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Romans 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1 Corinthians 6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Several of the ten commandments are actually in the 1 Corinthians passage.

How do we glorify God with our body now? Is it not through our spirit hearkening to His Spirit and not our flesh as it was before the bringing in of a better Covenant hearkening to condemnation?

If our souls are fulfilling God's Law of Love through its spirit, then we are fulfilling the written (physical) aspect of that Law not by the old method of self-gained righteousness acquired through our own deeds. But, we are fulfilling it according to God's method: spiritually.

We please God with our bodies not by hearkening to written laws, but by hearkening to His guiding Spirit who is the Law written upon our hearts.

 

[homwardbound]

Yes, and for the born again child of God it is all forgiven by confession and repentance (1Jn 1:9).

He does not lose his place in the elect family of God.

tell me elin is the above done once or over and over, after one does that confession, and receives the forgiveness of God? If you say, over and over, I need scripture that says this after the death of Christ at the cross of Christ please.

 

[cfultz3]

FYI

The Septuagint Bible Online

Septuagint

The Septuagint (LXX)

The Jews upheld the Septuagint very strongly for the first 300 years as the Word of God, but when the Christians took a hold of it, then the Jews rejected it. Then the Jews started rewriting the Septuagint in the 2nd and 3rd centuries to suit their purposes. They were "Making the word of God of none effect through [their] tradition " (Mark 7:13).

I did not know this. Thanks for the info

 

[homwardbound]

ask yourself this question if we were meant to follow the mosiac law why is there a new testament? and why did christ die for us? think about that.

you think he and others are denying the Christ as Savior, and I do not see this, as in what I have read as in what is their motive.
Just something to consider whether any one of us are walking by that self-righteous flesh Spirit that is dead. In "I" am right and you are wrong, my way "I" see it or else, man oh man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!