House of Cornelius and the law

[BibleGuy]

Deut. 30 is about Israel's return to the land and restoration under the new covenant. That happened nearly 2000 years ago.

Having a discussion with you is like having a discussion with a radio commercial. I was wondering if you'd even touch the points I made about the Levitical priesthood changing, and you didn't, as I suspected. Just more canned commercial. Have a nice day.

Hey now...let's be patient!

I only can type so much per day!

No commercial at all...just diligent truth-seeking, my friend.

Now, Dt. 30 says NOTHING about the New Covenant.

AND, Dt. 30:1-8 says 100% of Torah will again be obeyed after diaspora ends.

So, if you TRULY believe that Dt. 30:1-8 describes New Covenant, then you should also believe that 100% of Torah is obeyed in the New Covenant!

I will address whatever other issues you like...there's no mere "commercial" going on here!

Why assume the Levitical priesthood "changed"?

Are you talking about Heb. 7:12? (I don't remember you bringing this up...but is that what you had in mind?)

If so, then let's talk about it!

Sorry for asking...but there's so much activity here...I don't even remember what else you wanted to talk about.

What else did you want to talk about?

Maybe the prophecies which confirm that Levitical Torah WILL be restored? (Dt. 30; Zec. 14; Is. 66; Eze. 40-47; Jer. 33; Mal. 3)

Did YOU address these prophecies? (I don't even remember...yikes...)

I don't remember...please remind me...

best....
BibleGuy

 

[BibleGuy]

I said that " So, whatever understanding of God we get from the Old Covenant that doesn't line up with Jesus' manifestation of the Father will be inaccurate."


"We get"..being the operative words....

Nice try to change what I was saying really though....it shows creativity...albeit mis-leading.

They appear contradictory to you because Jesus came to fulfill the law and the law is a mere shadow of the real thing - which is Christ. To go back to the law is committing spiritual adultery on our Lord. Romans 7:1-6

Oh...ok....

Thank you for clarifying...

Now I see what you're trying to say...

But "fulfilled" does not mean "abolished". So, "fulfilled" is not an excuse to suppose Torah is not still in force.

And, Torah IS (present tense) a shadow...meaning the shadow CONTINUES (present tense) to PRESENTLY function. (again, this contradicts your position.)

And, spiritual adultery (Heb. "zanah", Ex. 34:15-16) refers to following OTHER gods and disobeying Torah.

Do you really think Paul opposes Ex. 34:15-16?

That would make no sense...because Paul tells us that sin IS Torah-disobedience (Rom. 7:7), and Paul tells us to NOT sin (Rom. 6:15), meaning NOT disobey Torah, meaning OBEY Torah.

So I still don't understand how your viewpoint explains away the previous sentence I just wrote.

No...I don't need another picture of t-shirts...I need to understand how YOU explain away the following reasoning:

1. Paul said don't sin (Rom. 6:15)
2. Paul said sin is Torah-disobedience (Rom. 3:20; 7:7).
3. Paul said "don't disobey Torah" (from 1 and 2).
4. Paul said "obey Torah" (from 3).

So, the logic here is pretty tight.

Which of these four premises do you dispute?

1? 2? 3? or 4?

And, if you accept ALL FOUR premises, then your position MUST be wrong.

But I can't imagine how you could seriously oppose 1 or 2 or 3 or 4.

So how do YOU explain your hope in Christ whose apostle (Paul) gave us writings which rationally lead us (via 1, 2, 3, and 4) to reject your view of Torah?

blessings...
BibleGuy

 

[simplifiedtruth]

cool again! so any law related to the sabbath must be re-interpreted in light of Jesus' teaching about how the sabbath should be a blessing and the sabbath was made for man etc.

so I can see that we don't need to be concerned about keeping any law related to the temple or the priesthood or cleanliness (since Jesus washes us) or food (since it doesn't matter what goes into our mouths).

what's your take on putting tassels on clothes?

Always remember Matthew 5:17-19 (Dont let it enter your mind that the law and the prophets is done away with).
There are various laws about cleanliness in the law we are to keep. Like women in their uncleanliness (menstrual, birth, Lev 12 separation after birth), men and their uncleanliness (the seed of the man) (Lev chap 15), touching/carrying carcases and dead snails. Clean and unclean food lawfull to eat (Lev chap 11).

Matthew 15:11 is not about Jesus making it ok for people to eat unclean unlawful food, no believer at that time did eat unclean food because they already knew and were following the Law. Jesus was referring to eating with unwashed hands which the pharisees taught as Law but was nothing more than religious commandments of men. The paraphrased (by this Jesus made all food clean) is added to the text in newer bible translation based solely upon mans eisegesis doctrine. You will not find this in any old bible 50-80 years ago.

We are to change our clothing too after conversion. Is it a first priority in the conversion process ? No. But just as important as any other command.

Laws of fringes and violet/purple border ribbons: Numbers 15:38-40 , deuteronomy 22:12.

Prophecy on the day of the Lord:
Zephaniah 1:8 And it shall come to pass in the day of the LORD'S sacrifice, that I will punish the princes, and the king's children, and all such as are clothed with strange apparel.

Here is some pictures of ancient actual Israelites carved in stone wearing fringes according to the Law and a garment made according to the Law today.

 

[Dan_473]

Hi there Dan_473...

Wow! Quite a bit of activity here in this thread, eh?

Trying to catch up on everything...

Thanks for asking..

Funny you should ask....I just read that passage again earlier today!

Lots of things going on here...

Luke (and early NT manuscripts, generally) were written in Greek.

BUT, do you really think that the Jewish Hebrew-speaking and Aramaic-speaking Jesus would read a Hebrew Nevi'im scroll in Greek at a Sabbath synagogue service, even when claiming a Hebrew-written prophecy is literally fulfilled in Himself at that very moment? I TRULY doubt it!

Do you really think that the Jewish Hebrew-speaking and Aramaic-speaking Jesus would publicly argue with Jewish scribes about Hebrew Scripture using the Greek language? Again...I doubt it.

So unless you can prove that all of the Greek sayings of Jesus (in the NT) were actually spoken in Greek, then you haven't established that Jesus prefers "lord" or "kurious" in place of "YHVH".

Remember, it is important to YHVH that we know that His name is YHVH (Jer. 16:21).

Sure...Jesus does seem to use "Father" a lot, rather than "YHVH".

And, since maybe the time of Ezra, the Jewish tradition developed to the point where the name YHVH was considered so holy that it would generally be replaced with a substitute (say, "adonai"). This tradition continues strongly in Jewish circles today. And, this tradition was already in place when the LXX was translated (hence the widespread replacement of "YHVH" with "kurious" in the LXX).

And maybe Jesus DID used "adonai" as a common Hebrew substitute for YHVH, simply out of respect for the tradition that had developed as of that time.

BUT, we need not feel required to embrace this tradition. Why? Because Jesus upholds the Pentateuch as authoritative Scripture, so we should too.

And what do we find in the Pentateuch itself? We find that usage of YHVH is widespread AND acceptable, when used properly.

Joshua was NOT afraid to proclaim that he served YHVH (Jos. 24:15). So, we can publicly proclaim this too!

There may be times, however, to respect the traditions of those you seek to engage...so be wise in all things.

blessings...
BibleGuy

yes, it's been a busy thread. I think that's good, because after a person becomes a christian, a thing they want to know is: How shall I live? what rules do I follow?

did Jesus speak hebrew? I hadn't heard that. so... the lxx was extremely popular at that time... the nt quotes it a lot... to me it seems very possible Jesus read Isaiah out of the lxx.

the question wasn't really about did Jesus say God's name, but why does Luke use kurious instead of yhwh?

Jesus did uphold the Pentateuch. we don't know how Jesus handled quotes from the ot when speaking in another language. Doesn't it seem reasonable to follow the pattern laid down by Luke and the rest of the apostles and use kurious instead of yhwh?

 

[Grace777x70]

Oh...ok....

Thank you for clarifying...

Now I see what you're trying to say...

But "fulfilled" does not mean "abolished". So, "fulfilled" is not an excuse to suppose Torah is not still in force.

And, Torah IS (present tense) a shadow...meaning the shadow CONTINUES (present tense) to PRESENTLY function. (again, this contradicts your position.)

And, spiritual adultery (Heb. "zanah", Ex. 34:15-16) refers to following OTHER gods and disobeying Torah.

Do you really think Paul opposes Ex. 34:15-16?

That would make no sense...because Paul tells us that sin IS Torah-disobedience (Rom. 7:7), and Paul tells us to NOT sin (Rom. 6:15), meaning NOT disobey Torah, meaning OBEY Torah.

So I still don't understand how your viewpoint explains away the previous sentence I just wrote.

No...I don't need another picture of t-shirts...I need to understand how YOU explain away the following reasoning:

1. Paul said don't sin (Rom. 6:15)
2. Paul said sin is Torah-disobedience (Rom. 3:20; 7:7).
3. Paul said "don't disobey Torah" (from 1 and 2).
4. Paul said "obey Torah" (from 3).

So, the logic here is pretty tight.

Which of these four premises do you dispute?

1? 2? 3? or 4?

And, if you accept ALL FOUR premises, then your position MUST be wrong.

But I can't imagine how you could seriously oppose 1 or 2 or 3 or 4.

So how do YOU explain your hope in Christ whose apostle (Paul) gave us writings which rationally lead us (via 1, 2, 3, and 4) to reject your view of Torah?

blessings...
BibleGuy

I will give out the purpose of the law again as Paul outlined in his epistles. I really am not interested in going over all this law stuff as I know to fix my eyes on Christ and that His life in me will fulfill the intent of the law.

I can trust the Holy spirit in me to guide me. I'm sure that the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus in me will guide me from wanting to do Lev 18:23 and have sex with animals.


The purpose of the law was :

1) To reveal our sinful state. Rom 3:20

2) To inflame sin Rom 7:8

3) To minister death in us Rom 7:10-11

4) To lead us to Christ Gal 3:24

The law is good and holy! But the purpose of the law was not for righteousness or salvation at all, it was to manifest sin in our lives, so that the purpose of grace which is in Jesus is to manifest salvation. Grace does not set aside the law, but completely satisfied it.

Col 2:13-15 is where in says that Christ "disarmed" satan having cancelled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us and He nailed it to the cross. Satan uses the law against us.

Satan comes and says to you - you broke the law - you are condemned now according to the law. BUT our Lord took that punishment for breaking that law for us.

When Christ takes away the condemnation of the law which satan uses against when he accuses us - he is being "disarmed". If disarmed means anything - it means he did have a weapon but now he doesn't because of our Lord. How great is our salvation in Him!



I'm posting scriptures for the viewers so that the Holy Spirit can show them the truth about not committing spiritual adultery on the Lord Jesus by going back to the law. ( Romans 7:1-6 )

Paul said to avoid disputes about the Law so I have no interest in engaging in useless debates. I'll trust the Holy spirit to do His job and reveal the things of Jesus to us! He is faithful to us.

Titus 3:9 (NASB)
[SUP]9 [/SUP] But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and strife and disputes about the Law, for they are unprofitable and worthless

 

[Dan_473]

Hi again!

Not required for obedience PRESENTLY (during this present diaspora)....but 100% REQUIRED for obedience in the future, as Moses Guaranteed (Dt. 30:1-8).

Remember, the "moedim" are NOT observed during diaspora (e.g., Lam. 1:4). And this should be a source of GRIEF and SORROW to us. This is why we LONG for a functioning temple to be rebuilt...so that we may again return to the land in full obedience to all Torah, just as the prophets guarantee will occur.

That's why Moses points out that 100% of Torah is not again observed until diaspora ends (Dt. 30:1-8).

Nevertheless, Mosaic Torah is still in force...but just not 100% presently observable.

And is this an excuse to NOT observe presently observable Torah portions? Absolutely not.

And is this an excuse to suppose Mosaic Torah is permanently terminated/abolished? No.

So, your "not required for obedience" comment is a dangerous flirtation with the negative consequences of Mt. 5:19.

Let's rephrase your comment to this: "Not required (presently, during this diaspora) for obedience, but definitely required in the future after the diaspora ends".

This is what Scripture declares. That's why I believe it.

blessings...
BibleGuy

PS I'm glad you've been thinking about these things! Sorry if I offended you...but I was trying to broaden that comment to the broader collection of readers here...many of whom may well have NOT adequately thought through these issues.

so we don't have to do the traveling part of the commandment because we're currently in a diaspora.

Why do you say we are in a diaspora? to me, it looks like there's nothing preventing lawkeeping jews and christians from going to Israel. not like the babylonian captivity or roman armies killing loads of people.


so, we use our intellect to see how the different laws are to be kept, like is it possible or do we know the purpose behind them, things like that... does that sound reasonable?



do you mean that all of torah is "Not required (presently, during this diaspora) for obedience, but definitely required in the future after the diaspora ends"?



no, I wasn't offended, it just seemed like an interesting thing to assume, that if someone sees something differently, they haven't thought about it...
blessings!

 

[Dan_473]

Hi again,

The Old Covenant is ready (Gr. "engoos", Heb. 8:13) to pass away. Thus, it had NOT yet passed away as of the New-Covenant-Era time of the writing of the book of Hebrews.

So, since Old Covenant is in force, and since YHVH is used in the Old Covenant, then it's OK to say YHVH!

blessings...
BibleGuy

sure, I'll rephrase it
yhwh is the name God uses in the old covenant, it's not there in the new covenant (or, "testament") writings.

I don't think it's a matter of OK to say or not, to me it's about following the pattern of the apostles

do you believe the old covenant is still in force?

 

[Ahwatukee]

Morning BibleGuy,

But "fulfilled" does not mean "abolished". So, "fulfilled" is not an excuse to suppose Torah is not still in force.

When Jesus said "do not think that I have come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it," he was saying that he didn't come to toss the law aside as unimportant, but he came to meet its righteous requirements, bringing it to fulfillment. What Jesus did not come to do was to perpetuate the law, that is, he did not come to keep it going. When he fulfilled the law, He did it perfectly and nailed it to the cross.

Consequently, anyone who is trusting in the works of the law to obtain salvation will not enter in. Our salvation is obtained by having faith in Jesus as the One who provided salvation for us, completely and fully. Anyone who brings in any other works as a requirement for salvation is basically saying that Jesus' sacrifice was insufficient. Trusting in Jesus for our salvation puts the focus on what He did, whereas trusting in our efforts puts the focus on our works.

"God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it is a gift from God. Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it."

 

[Dan_473]

The Spirit testifies that Torah is written upon our hearts (Heb. 10:15-16).

So, there need be no contradiction between "law" and "Spirit" when properly understood and obeyed.

Sure, "letter" without "Spirit" is bad (e.g., Rom. 7:6).

But, "Spirit" without "Torah" is also bad (because it's contrary to Heb. 10:15-16).

That's why we need BOTH!

Paul critiques FAITHLESS Torah-obedience...

Paul does NOT critique FAITHFUL Torah-obedience.

Failure to recognize this will quickly land you in a boat-load of contradictions.

And no...we do not always know the reasons for the commandments...but that's not an excuse to ignore the role that such possible (or probable) reasons could play in our evaluation of their meaning in the past (and application in the present).

Blessings...
BibleGuy

great! so we use the reasons behind why laws are given, and it sounds like we want to be led by the Holy Spirit in understanding how we obey torah in our lives.

being led by the Spirit, then, I think different people might be in different places as they learn and grow... I think we can agree that no human currently understands all of torah, there are always new things we can learn.

so one person might feel they need to travel to Jerusalem in order to be obedient, another might not,

still another might look at Jesus saying he is the bread of life and believe that keeping the feast means feasting on Jesus whose flesh is true food. we look for how the spirit understands the letter!

 

[Ahwatukee]

great! so we use the reasons behind why laws are given, and it sounds like we want to be led by the Holy Spirit in understanding how we obey torah in our lives.

being led by the Spirit, then, I think different people might be in different places as they learn and grow... I think we can agree that no human currently understands all of torah, there are always new things we can learn.

so one person might feel they need to travel to Jerusalem in order to be obedient, another might not,

still another might look at Jesus saying he is the bread of life and believe that keeping the feast means feasting on Jesus whose flesh is true food. we look for how the spirit understands the letter!

Morning Dan_473,

Regarding faith vs. the law, Paul said it best in the following scripture:


"What does all this mean? Even though the Gentiles were not trying to follow God’s standards, they were made right with God. And it was by faith that this took place. But the people of Israel, who tried so hard to get right with God by keeping the law, never succeeded. Why not? Because they were trying to get right with God by keeping the law[SUP]o[/SUP] instead of by trusting in him. They stumbled over the great rock in their path."

 

[simplifiedtruth]

Morning BibleGuy,



When Jesus said "do not think that I have come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it," he was saying that he didn't come to toss the law aside as unimportant, but he came to meet its righteous requirements, bringing it to fulfillment. What Jesus did not come to do was to perpetuate the law, that is, he did not come to keep it going. When he fulfilled the law, He did it perfectly and nailed it to the cross.

Consequently, anyone who is trusting in the works of the law to obtain salvation will not enter in. Our salvation is obtained by having faith in Jesus as the One who provided salvation for us, completely and fully. Anyone who brings in any other works as a requirement for salvation is basically saying that Jesus' sacrifice was insufficient. Trusting in Jesus for our salvation puts the focus on what He did, whereas trusting in our efforts puts the focus on our works.

"God saved you by his grace when you believed. And you can’t take credit for this; it is a gift from God. Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it."

I agree that we receive Jesus Christ solely upon faith and believing, but we must not forget John the baptist who came to prepare the way of our Saviour with the baptism of repentance. That is the attitude we need to have in order to receive Jesus Christ, to admit that we are sinners and have the will to turn from living in them and come back to the Father by being obedient. It is the answer of a good conscience toward God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ that saves us with this attitude (1 Peter 3:21):

The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

People who are to receive Jesus Christ by being baptized of the Spirit into the body of Christ need to have this attitude towards their sins and about turning back to the Fathers commandments and not wanting to repeat them again. One does not always automatically get baptized into the body by hearing the gospel preached like the instance with them that heard Peter preach (Acts 10:44). Some people need to gain or or show this attitude of repentance in order to be baptized into the body of Christ, and the evidence of that good conscience towards Christ is the fruit that follows. Born again believers are to grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ and strive for holiness by purifying their spirit and keeping of the commandments.

Matthew 3:3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.4And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey. 5Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan, 6And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.7But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:

Now grace is the divine influence upon the heart that leads us to repentance of our sins and to Jesus Christ.

 

[Dan_473]

Hi Dan_473...

Why assume we need not keep any law pertaining to temple?

my understanding of simplifiedtruth's position was that since Paul says we are the temple, laws relating to the temple are not currently observed.

Temple laws WILL be observable (and required) again in the future.

Sure, Jesus says Sabbath is made for man (not the reverse). But that's a completely Torah-consistent statement by Jesus. So there's no abolition of Torah going on here. Rather, merely explanation of the true nature of ongoing Torah.

ok, I'm following you there

And sure, many laws are PRESENTLY unobservable...but that's only temporary (given Dt. 30:1-8 and other prophecies).

And sure...Jesus said all foods are clean...but he did NOT say that all things are food!

I'm not following what you're saying there about "all things are food".

Thus, Lev. 11 is still observable (and is likewise applied to us in 1 Pe. 1:15-16).

I think Peter is saying do not be conformed to the former lusts. I think Jesus meant that what you eat doesn't make you unholy.

 

[Dan_473]

Now now! You just changed your position! Or maybe that's just a contradiction? Or maybe you're trying to say something but it didn't quite come out right?

First you said: "So, whatever understanding of God we get from the Old Covenant that doesn't line up with Jesus' manifestation of the Father will be inaccurate."

Then you said: "Jesus is not opposed to the Old Covenant as your straw-man erected in your mind."

My response: How are these two statements consistent?

I mean, if Jesus manifested the Father in a way that does NOT LINE UP with some portion of the Old Covenant, then Jesus would clearly be OPPOSED to that portion, right?


Maybe you need to revise (or rephrase) your words...

They appear quite contradictory.

blessings...
BibleGuy

(I'm not speaking for Grace777x70 here, just my understanding of what was written)


I think this is an excellent example of the imprecision of human language, of two people reading the same thing and thinking something different from it... and why we need the Holy Spirit to help us understand the scriptures (I assume everybody already agrees with the last part).



when I read

So, whatever understanding of God we get from the Old Covenant that doesn't line up with Jesus' manifestation of the Father will be inaccurate.

what stood out to me was "we get". the understanding "we get" out of a passage might not be what God meant when He wrote it.

so, no conflict between what Jesus said and did, and what God wrote... but a human reader might not "get it".

 

[Dan_473]

Always remember Matthew 5:17-19 (Dont let it enter your mind that the law and the prophets is done away with).
There are various laws about cleanliness in the law we are to keep. Like women in their uncleanliness (menstrual, birth, Lev 12 separation after birth), men and their uncleanliness (the seed of the man) (Lev chap 15), touching/carrying carcases and dead snails. Clean and unclean food lawfull to eat (Lev chap 11).

Matthew 15:11 is not about Jesus making it ok for people to eat unclean unlawful food, no believer at that time did eat unclean food because they already knew and were following the Law. Jesus was referring to eating with unwashed hands which the pharisees taught as Law but was nothing more than religious commandments of men. The paraphrased (by this Jesus made all food clean) is added to the text in newer bible translation based solely upon mans eisegesis doctrine. You will not find this in any old bible 50-80 years ago.

We are to change our clothing too after conversion. Is it a first priority in the conversion process ? No. But just as important as any other command.

Laws of fringes and violet/purple border ribbons: Numbers 15:38-40 , deuteronomy 22:12.

Prophecy on the day of the Lord:
Zephaniah 1:8 And it shall come to pass in the day of the LORD'S sacrifice, that I will punish the princes, and the king's children, and all such as are clothed with strange apparel.

Here is some pictures of ancient actual Israelites carved in stone wearing fringes according to the Law and a garment made according to the Law today.

View attachment 151398View attachment 151399

I think this is another good example of how two people will read the same passage in torah and come away with different understandings of how to act.

my impression was that the recipe for dealing with uncleaness and impurity was washing.

Jesus cleansed the church by the washing of water with the word. Ephesians 5

give for gifts to the needy those things which are within, and check it out, all things will be clean to you. Luke 11

so, as I read it, no further washings or sacrifices needed.



do you put tassels on your clothes? of all the lawkeepers I've talked to on CC, only one said he did... (and I think he was raised jewish... imo, in certain cases the Spirit will lead a christian to wear tassels)

 

[Dan_473]

Like women in their uncleanliness (menstrual, birth, Lev 12 separation after birth), men and their uncleanliness (the seed of the man) (Lev chap 15), touching/carrying carcases and dead snails.

another idea from Titus, To the pure, all things are pure

 

[Dan_473]

Titus 3:9 (NASB)
[SUP]9 [/SUP] But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and strife and disputes about the Law, for they are unprofitable and worthless

I think that's a good thing to remember

 

[simplifiedtruth]

I think that's a good thing to remember

This is a classic example of taking the text out of context. You should always read before and after a verse to get the context of what is being said.

Titus 3:8 [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.Avoiding Divisions9But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. 10A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; 11Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

Believe it or not but strivings in the law about genealogies have always been a big topic causing strife.

We are not to strive with people about the law if they choose to still be an heretic after the first and second admonition here.
Always remember Matthew 5:17-19.

Jeremiah 17:9 [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The heart [/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]is [/FONT]deceitful [FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]above [/FONT]all things[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], and [/FONT]desperately wicked[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]: who can know it?[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]People will almost always go towards the way of the flesh if they are not convinced about what is Truth. The easiest way.[/FONT]

 

[simplifiedtruth]

another idea from Titus, To the pure, all things are pure

Titus 1:10 [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: 11Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. 12One of themselves, [FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians [/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. [/FONT]13[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This witness is true. Wherefore [/FONT]rebuke them sharply[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], that they may be [/FONT]sound in the faith[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]; [/FONT]14[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Not giving heed to [/FONT]Jewish fables, and commandments of men[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], that turn [/FONT]from the truth[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]. [/FONT]15[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Unto the [/FONT]pure all things are pure[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]: but unto them that are [/FONT]defiled [FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]and [/FONT]unbelieving [FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]is [/FONT]nothing pure[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]; but even their [/FONT]mind [FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]and [/FONT]conscience [FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]is [/FONT]defiled[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]. [/FONT]16[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]They [/FONT]profess [FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]that they [/FONT]know God[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]; but in [/FONT]works they deny him[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], being [/FONT]abominable[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], and [/FONT]disobedient[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], and unto [/FONT]every good work reprobate.

Psalm 119:142 [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/FONT]Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.

John 14:6 [FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Jesus saith unto him, I am the [/FONT]way[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], the [/FONT]truth[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], and the [/FONT]life[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]: no man cometh unto the Father, [/FONT]but by me[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif].[/FONT]

[FONT=Trebuchet, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The pure in this context is those who are pure in heart and obedient to the Father. To those that are not pure, everything is unclean (like the eating with unwashed hands (Matt 15:2) and other jewish fables and doctrines of men (Titus 1:14).

If you have the seed of man upon you then you are to wash yourselves and your clothes and be unclean until the evening. If you have the blood of a womans period on you then you are to wash yourself and clothes and be unclean until the evening. If you carry the carcase of a dead animal you are to wash yourself and be unclean unto the evening. When a woman has a child she is to separate herself with the child for 7 days for a male child and 14 days for a woman child (Probably for the protection of the child to build up its immune system, my toughs about it).

Always remember Matthew 5:17-19.[/FONT]

 

[simplifiedtruth]

I think this is another good example of how two people will read the same passage in torah and come away with different understandings of how to act.

my impression was that the recipe for dealing with uncleaness and impurity was washing.

Jesus cleansed the church by the washing of water with the word. Ephesians 5

give for gifts to the needy those things which are within, and check it out, all things will be clean to you. Luke 11

so, as I read it, no further washings or sacrifices needed.



do you put tassels on your clothes? of all the lawkeepers I've talked to on CC, only one said he did... (and I think he was raised jewish... imo, in certain cases the Spirit will lead a christian to wear tassels)

The way you deal with physical uncleanliness is you wash your body and clothes what has become unclean from it and become clean in the evening.

I have clothing with fringes and violet/purple border. You can make the fringes and sew them on what ever you like or buy from others.

 

[BibleGuy]

yes, it's been a busy thread. I think that's good, because after a person becomes a christian, a thing they want to know is: How shall I live? what rules do I follow?

did Jesus speak hebrew? I hadn't heard that. so... the lxx was extremely popular at that time... the nt quotes it a lot... to me it seems very possible Jesus read Isaiah out of the lxx.

the question wasn't really about did Jesus say God's name, but why does Luke use kurious instead of yhwh?

Jesus did uphold the Pentateuch. we don't know how Jesus handled quotes from the ot when speaking in another language. Doesn't it seem reasonable to follow the pattern laid down by Luke and the rest of the apostles and use kurious instead of yhwh?

Hi there Dan_473...

Yes...the questions are VERY important: (1) Who are we?, and (2) How should we live?

These are definitely top-priority concerns for us as Christians!

I've learned that Christians are included as Israelites.

I've learned that Christians should grow in faithful obedience to Torah.

I've learned that most Christians do not know this yet!

So, we've got a LOT of work to do in the discipleship/teaching/training category in the body of Christ.

Things appear to be moving in the right direction (far as I can tell)...but it's a slow process to be sure.

You wrote: "to me it seems very possible Jesus read Isaiah out of the lxx."

My response: Yes...maybe...but that's no good reason to neglect Jer. 16:21 which confirms that YHVH desires that we know that YHVH's name is YHVH!

You wrote: "the question wasn't really about did Jesus say God's name, but why does Luke use kurious instead of yhwh?"

My response: The tradition of translating "YHVH" as "kurious" already existed at the time of the LXX translation. So, Luke could be viewed as simply continuing that tradition.

But, this tradition was not from the beginning...for example, Joshua freely used the name YHVH (Jos. 24:15).

You wrote: "we don't know how Jesus handled quotes from the ot when speaking in another language."

My response: Careful! If Jesus was using Hebrew to quote Hebrew Scripture...then (by definition of "quote") Jesus necessarily quoted the Hebrew, which entails that Jesus' would use the name YHVH when using Hebrew to quote Hebrew.

You wrote: "Doesn't it seem reasonable to follow the pattern laid down by Luke and the rest of the apostles and use kurious instead of yhwh?"

My response: The pattern laid down by Luke was consistent with a post-Pentateuch tradition regarding translation of "YHVH" into Greek "kurious".

But, if you don't speak Greek, then don't feel obligated to use "kurious" instead of YHVH.

Furthermore, when speaking English, don't feel obligated to use "lord" instead of YHVH, because the english term "lord" also translates the Hebrew term "adonai". Thus, the English "lord" is ambiguous with respect to possible Hebrew back-translations.

And again, it's important to YHVH that we know that YHVH's name is YHVH! (Jer. 16:21). So by using the name YHVH, we help to educate the many Christians who do not even know the Name! This is a good thing to do.

blessings...
BibleGuy