Gentile Christians sharing the Gospel with Jews

[peacefulbeliever]

What I indicate is that Jesus, Abraham and Moses are seen in different categories separated according to personal beliefs and understanding. The legalistic Pharisees refused to see Jesus as the true Messiah who created all things including those promises made to Abraham and Israel via Moses.

The main reason they did not see Jesus as the true Messiah was because they ignored the prophecies concerning "the suffering servant" and only "saw" those prophecies concerning the "conquering King". They expected the Messiah to come in conquering not suffering which is why they ridiculed his claim to be King of the Jews.

[SUP]"[/SUP]Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" (John 5:45-47)

They were accused through Moses because they thought they could be accepted by God through the law legalities (most of what they invented, now called the talmud) minus the faith required. Moses' and Abraham's faithful responses are our example and was theirs also. They were under the law and not free from the letter of the law or the law of sin and death. If they would have believed as Jesus was saying, they would be looking into the perfect law of liberty as James ( the brother of Jesus) wrote.

And just as Abraham [his writings] spoke for God - These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel . . . So Moses went back . . .and set before them all the words the LORD had commanded him to speak [Ex. 19:6b,7] - Jesus words were given to him by his Father - For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken. [John 12:49] Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. . . .[John 5:43]

Problem for all - the children of Israel, the Pharisees, people of the gospels and the church - but the word preached did not profit them not being mixed with faith in them that heard it . . . . [Hebrews 4:2]

 

[peacefulbeliever]

The law entered because of transgression. As we read in John chapter 1 and Colssians chapter 1 Jesus was in the beginning and created all things and is the same then as He is today. God works in sequence of events that are perfect and nothing He has ever given is subject to change in truth for He is perfect.

"Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever." (Hebrews 13:8)

Our Lord Jesus Christ who has led us out of bondage and into His promise is the same as the Lord that led Israel out of bondage and into the promised land. There is a unchanging relevance to those two events.

Exodus 23:20-22
[SUP]20 [/SUP]Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
[SUP]21 [/SUP]Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
[SUP]22 [/SUP]But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries.

Then those that say - I can have more than one wife are correct and those that say only "one husband", "one wife" are correct because both are in scripture.

Those that say "I can marry my sister" are correct. Those that say "I can marry my wife's sister" are correct - which was true in the beginning but has been nullified by the laws set up in Leviticus - both are scripture so anyone could apply both because things have not changed.

Those that say "You can't eat pork" and those that say "You can eat anything" are correct. Those that say "You must keep the Sabbath" and those that say "every day is the same" - both are correct because both are in scripture.

And nothing changes!!!! Rules do not change!!!!! No wonder people say the Bible is full of contradictions!!!!!!!

YES, Jesus Christ is the same, but rules that are applicable to life have changed . . . . .

 

[Elin]

Should we not be one body in Christ, both Jews and Gentile believers?

Both Jew and Gentile believers are one body in Christ.

Should we not be more aware of God's will concerning Jews, and strive for a connection with them in Christ Jesus?

God's will concerning Jews is the same as his will concerning all mankind--all who believe in Jesus Christ are saved from God's condemnation.

That will of God is being accomplished in a remnant of Jews (Ro 11:5), just as it is being accomplished in a remnant of all mankind.

"But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you." (Romans 10:19)

"I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. (Romans 11:11)

Yes, that is why a remnant of the Jews comes in.

 

[peacefulbeliever]

One more thing. In the instructions God gave to Israel through Moses, Gentiles were able to be incorporated into their ranks same as in the New Covenant through Christ Jesus.

Exodus 12:48 And when a stranger shall sojourn with thee, and will keep the passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.

The above is before the law was given.

Leviticus 25:35 And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee; then thou shalt relieve him: yea, though he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee.

This is after the law was given. The law given to Moses only instructs the circumcision of the heart but not the flesh.

Are you saying that the above is the same as the "new covenant", the "new birth", being "born again" as in Jew and Gentile becoming "one body"?

 

[Elin]

. . .I do however think it is time for all professing believers in Christ to agree with
the substantial place God has made for Israel

There is no more "substantial place" than "in Christ," where all believers in Christ reside.

We as Christians should show them grace, love, and mercy that we have received from God the Father through His Son Yeshua Messiah
in order for all to see that we are one in Christ.

Only believers in Jesus Christ are one in Christ.
There is no grace, love and mercy being denied by Christians to Jewish believers in Christ.

 

[Elin]

There are many "doctrines". There is only one Messiah. He was slain from the foundation of the world it is written, so time is relevant in your mind only.
You see Torah as bondage, I see it as freedom. Blood was spilled once and for all as our sacrifice, to pay the price for our freedom to serve our Creator in the way in which He has instructed.

Yes, and our instruction is the commandments of Jesus in Mt 22:37-39, in the keeping of which the whole OT is kept (Mt 22:40).

 

[Elin]

The Jews (belonging to Israel but not Israel as a whole) have learned that God's children are seen by God as communal and classify themselves as one nation. This is Old Testament truth.
Evangelical persuasion sees the relationship with God as individual (in general) and not communal

Nope. . .the NT called-out assembly (ekklesia) composed of all believers in Jesus Christ is communal.

 

[just-me]

Then those that say - I can have more than one wife are correct and those that say only "one husband", "one wife" are correct because both are in scripture.

Those that say "I can marry my sister" are correct. Those that say "I can marry my wife's sister" are correct - which was true in the beginning but has been nullified by the laws set up in Leviticus - both are scripture so anyone could apply both because things have not changed.

Those that say "You can't eat pork" and those that say "You can eat anything" are correct. Those that say "You must keep the Sabbath" and those that say "every day is the same" - both are correct because both are in scripture.

And nothing changes!!!! Rules do not change!!!!! No wonder people say the Bible is full of contradictions!!!!!!!

YES, Jesus Christ is the same, but rules that are applicable to life have changed . . . . .

Numerous wives were the downfall of Solomon. David lost his firstborn by Bathsheba (Uriah's wife) because of sin. Here is a good example of spiritual relations to the law given to Moses by God.

Exodus 22:1 If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.

2 Samuel 12:1-7
1 And the Lord sent Nathan unto David. And he came unto him, and said unto him, There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor.
[SUP]2 [/SUP]The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds:
[SUP]3 [/SUP]But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.
[SUP]5 [/SUP]And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the Lord liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die:
[SUP]6 [/SUP]And he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity.
[SUP]7 [/SUP]And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;

Nevertheless David was a man after God's own heart, and Solomon was Bathsheba's son too. I do agree that there is a change but not in spiritual principles. The Physical is a foreshadowing as far as I am concerned. The Spiritual is the completion. The legalists (as is termed by some) cannot see the spiritual relationship to the physical instruction given to Israel during the time of Moses. For example, Israel's exodus from Egypt (the world in relation) correlates precisely with the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior. It is also a precise relationship that the very day (centuries later but the same day) Christ rose from the dead, Israel crossed the Red Sea. It is also relevant that the same time Moses was called up to the mountain to receive the tablets of stone is the same as when God sent the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

 

[Elin]

Like Karraster said and I endorse from experience,
many Christians today view the Torah as bondage, She and I see it as freedom from bondage. Its the "law of liberty" to those who believe. Communal thing ya know.

They are in agreement with the Apostle (Gal 5:1, 4:9, 4:24-25).

 

[Elin]

As the lawless Pharisees (not all of them) desired Jesus to be a separate entity from Abraham and Moses, so do many today want the same. In relation,
God's will is for the Jews and the Gentiles to be as one in Christ, but as we can see, the wiles of
the adversary desires schism within the ranks of religion.

Where are you getting the notion that Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ are not the one body of Christ as the NT teaches?

 

[Elin]

The law given to Moses only instructs the circumcision of the heart but not the flesh.

Nope. . .we find otherwise (Dt 10:16) in Moses' repetition of that Law in Deuteronomy in preparation for their going out to Canaan after their 40-year "derailment" in the wilderness for failing to go out the first time.

 

[just-me]

God never condoned polygamy but like divorce he allowed it to occur and did not bring an immediate punishment for this disobedience.

Deuteronomy. 17:14-17 “I will set a king over me like all the nations that are around me,' “you shall surely set a king over you whom the LORD your God chooses; one from among your brethren you shall set as king over you; you may not set a foreigner over you, who is not your brother. But he shall not multiply horses for himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt to multiply horses, for the LORD has said to you, 'You shall not return that way again.' “Neither shall he multiply wives for himself, lest his heart turn away; nor shall he greatly multiply silver and gold for himself.” This is the command of God, and he has never changed it.’

Was Abraham, David Solomon condemned or approved for practicing polygamy? Well they certainly did not get blessed for it! In fact every polygamist in the Bible like David and Solomon (1 Chron. 14:3) were punished. This should be evidence that this is not God’s will. Scripture has always commanded monogamy (Ps.128:3; Prov. 5:18; 18:22; 19:14; 31:10-29; Eccl. 9:9).

 

[DesiredHaven]

Numerous wives were the downfall of Solomon. David lost his firstborn by Bathsheba (Uriah's wife) because of sin. Here is a good example of spiritual relations to the law given to Moses by God.

Exodus 22:1 If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.

2 Samuel 12:1-7
1 And the Lord sent Nathan unto David. And he came unto him, and said unto him, There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor.
[SUP]2 [/SUP]The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds:
[SUP]3 [/SUP]But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.
[SUP]5 [/SUP]And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the Lord liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die:
[SUP]6 [/SUP]And he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity.
[SUP]7 [/SUP]And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;

Nevertheless David was a man after God's own heart, and Solomon was Bathsheba's son too. I do agree that there is a change but not in spiritual principles. The Physical is a foreshadowing as far as I am concerned. The Spiritual is the completion. The legalists (as is termed by some) cannot see the spiritual relationship to the physical instruction given to Israel during the time of Moses. For example, Israel's exodus from Egypt (the world in relation) correlates precisely with the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior. It is also a precise relationship that the very day (centuries later but the same day) Christ rose from the dead, Israel crossed the Red Sea. It is also relevant that the same time Moses was called up to the mountain to receive the tablets of stone is the same as when God sent the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

Ever notice the same wording is here in Zacchaeus as well?

Luke 19:8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.

Luke 19:9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.

There Zacchaeus is called a son of Abraham

 

[Jeff_56]

he didn't just say - thank yahweh for mercy and forgiveness;

he restored plus and repented -- HE DID SOMETHING !!!!!!!!!!! DID DID DID DID DID DID DID DID something

not worried nor even ever thought that IF HE DID something, someone would ACCUSE HIM FALSELY of being under the law and execute him for his sin.

again..... HE DID SOMETHING !!!!!

 

[sparty-g]

They are in agreement with the Apostle (Gal 5:1, 4:9, 4:24-25).

So do you believe that God took the Israelites out of Egyptian bondage just to subject them to another form of bondage in the Torah?

 

[Jeff_56]

Torah leads to Christ. Torah is all that flows from Yahweh for us.(who are His).

to say Torah is in any way 'bondage' shows a complete lack of knowledge of Yahweh and Scripture and Yahshua.

 

[sparty-g]

Torah leads to Christ. Torah is all that flows from Yahweh for us.(who are His).

to say Torah is in any way 'bondage' shows a complete lack of knowledge of Yahweh and Scripture and Yahshua.

As I said in another post, my friend, it's a funny switcheroo that some people believe: Sin was once bondage and keeping the commands of God was liberty from that bondage. Now keeping the commands of God is bondage (sin) and liberty is being "free" of them.

But I think this has derailed the OP...

 

[peacefulbeliever]

Numerous wives were the downfall of Solomon. David lost his firstborn by Bathsheba (Uriah's wife) because of sin. Here is a good example of spiritual relations to the law given to Moses by God.

Exodus 22:1 If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.

2 Samuel 12:1-7
1 And the Lord sent Nathan unto David. And he came unto him, and said unto him, There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor.
[SUP]2 [/SUP]The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds:
[SUP]3 [/SUP]But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.
[SUP]5 [/SUP]And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the Lord liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die:
[SUP]6 [/SUP]And he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity.
[SUP]7 [/SUP]And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;

Nevertheless David was a man after God's own heart, and Solomon was Bathsheba's son too. I do agree that there is a change but not in spiritual principles. The Physical is a foreshadowing as far as I am concerned. The Spiritual is the completion. The legalists (as is termed by some) cannot see the spiritual relationship to the physical instruction given to Israel during the time of Moses. For example, Israel's exodus from Egypt (the world in relation) correlates precisely with the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior. It is also a precise relationship that the very day (centuries later but the same day) Christ rose from the dead, Israel crossed the Red Sea. It is also relevant that the same time Moses was called up to the mountain to receive the tablets of stone is the same as when God sent the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.

I understand the foreshadowing in the OT representing the things concerning Jesus Christ. However, I believe the crossing of the Red Sea was a foreshadow of Israel entering into new life - from bondage to freedom equaling or paralleling with the new birth - entering into a new relationship with God and Christ from bondage of the law to freedom IN Christ. I see the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ being parallel with the Passover. I do not equate receiving the tablets of stone with receiving the gift of holy spirit at Pentecost. . . . How in the world is receiving the tablets of stone equate with the infilling of the holy Spirit?

 

[Jeff_56]

notice:
addendum:
not all of the changes reported in this thread took place.
one sure test > if the rcc changed anything, don't listen to it. it's better to stay with God's Word.

that will apply to a lot of various things in christendom, and also is one BIG? reason the Jews reject the

preaching of the gospel for so long in so many places ---

- if the preaching is in line with rcc, it is not in line with Scripture,

and the Jews see that at once. (often)(Yahweh Willing). and they point it out often enough to know they see it,

besides anyone who knows the Word of Yahweh also sees it clearly.

anyway, the importance is (in this thread), some of the things that 'regular' believers believe (hang on to as if true)

are not at all true (oh, other things are certainly true, that the same 'regular' believers believe),

so, there is or will be or has been a winnowing, a cleansing, a renewal, a chastisement, a purge(of sin),

a reminder (of Scripture/Torah), an edification, a simple lesson (in and of Yahweh's Simple(Basic) Truth),

until all of the ekklesia who are called according to His Purpose in Yahshua Hamashiach are perfected in

Him and (yes, quite literally) in 100% agreement with Him (by His Doing) in union with Him in Yahshua and in union (yes, quite literally) with one another in Him, with no heretics, or dogs, or swine, or any who deviate willfully from His Will; (infants, young ones, the weak in faith: all gladly and completely accepted in Him with no reservations - being they are quite totally different from those of evil nature)..

so then all ekklesia immersed in Jesus' Name and abiding in Him willingly and joyously and totally subject to Him by grace and by His Wonderful Accomplishment.....

 

[DesiredHaven]

he didn't just say - thank yahweh for mercy and forgiveness;

he restored plus and repented -- HE DID SOMETHING !!!!!!!!!!! DID DID DID DID DID DID DID DID something

not worried nor even ever thought that IF HE DID something, someone would ACCUSE HIM FALSELY of being under the law and execute him for his sin.

again..... HE DID SOMETHING !!!!!

I do believe that picture represents a man who learned under John the baptist (of whom) Jesus had said, "the publicans and harlots believed John) and Zach was not only a publican, but a chief publican (being of those who had believd John according to Jesus). Johns baptism being that of repentance (but he also had a teaching). And so when we see Zach (before the Lord) saying "behold Lord!" there, I believe it shows the outworking of what is understood to be "a godly sorrow" (in that picture). Which seems to be in contrast to "the worldly sorrow" (which needs to be repented of) as is shown in the rich young ruler (who couldnt part with anything). These seemly owning him, and his having great possessions seemed to be an example of one having a love for the things of the world.

But at least you can see the outworking in quite a few things there.

Firstly, in who Zach (as he was a publican) of which Jesus said, the publicans and harlots were of those who believed John who came in the way of righteousness (whose baptism was of repentance). And a couple of portions of Johns teachings is shown in Zach and one (in breif) was he that hath two coats impart to him that hath none (and likewise do the same with ones meat) In otherwords, food and rainment. Zachs, words were, Behold Lord! I give half (or two coats- one= half) or Johns teaching. And so we see that this is that found in Zach's own profession for the Lord to behold of him there. And, Jesus calls him a son of Abraham too.

To me it shows a godly sorrow working in Zach and its outworking (one might behold) and he was not reproved for this either, so there is something in it more then peoples "works" hang ups even as we are created in Christ unto the good works.

But here more specifically, it is as Paul points out (as is shown in Zach) that godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of. Which seems to show the reason why Jesus (who naturally comes after John, who prepares the way before him) said, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.

So, godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation and Jesus said to this display in Zach, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.

I just believe theres a way of looking at that picture that ministers a better understanding between the two pictures (of two different kinds of sorrow) and what each works, and how each can be shown to some extent in the gospel (according to those same truths).