Page 8 of 39

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:23 pm
by Gman
RickD wrote:Gman, my dog eats my cat's poop. When guests come over my house, I encourage my dog to give all my guests wet, sloppy kisses. Gman, you're invited to my house. ;)
I'll have to pass on that one... ;)
RickD wrote:I'll make sure your invite isn't for a Saturday though, because if you're obeying the sabbath law, you can't leave your house nor drive a car. y[-(
You can leave your house to go to the synagogue. Nothing in G-d's commandments about that.. As for driving your car, that doesn't require you peddling your car either.. Unless you are Fred Flintstone.

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:26 pm
by RickD
Cheezerrox wrote:
This argument may be valid if Torah simply said, "Do not eat swine, do not eat rabbit, do not eat shellfish." But, while the Torah does give specific examples, it establishes general criteria for which animals are clean and unclean. Leviticus 11:2-4, 9-10 give these criteria; for land animals, eat only those that have split hooves and chew the cud; for sea animals, eat only those that have fins and scales.
Cheezey, do you see anything in Leviticus 11:2-4 that may lead you to believe that the law was given to Israel specifically? Let's see:
 “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘These are the creatures which you may eat from all the animals that are on the earth. 3 Whatever divides a hoof, thus making split hoofs, and chews the cud, among the animals, that you may eat. 4 Nevertheless, you are not to eat of these, among those which chew the cud, or among those which divide the hoof: the camel, for though it chews cud, it does not divide the hoof, it is unclean to you.

Perhaps, the part that says, "speak to the sons of Israel, saying" might give us an idea that the message was for the sons of Israel, not everybody. No, I guess I'm reading into the text. "sons of Israel is just a generic term for gentile believers in Christ. What was I thinking? y:O2

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:50 pm
by RickD
Gman wrote:
You can leave your house to go to the synagogue. Nothing in G-d's commandments about that.. As for driving your car, that doesn't require you peddling your car either.. Unless you are Fred Flintstone.
G, unless your car doesn't have an internal combustion engine, you're breaking the sabbath law by igniting a fire on the sabbath. Looks like you need to stay home after all. :mrgreen:

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:00 pm
by Gman
RickD wrote: Cheezey, do you see anything in Leviticus 11:2-4 that may lead you to believe that the law was given to Israel specifically? Let's see:
 “Speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘These are the creatures which you may eat from all the animals that are on the earth. 3 Whatever divides a hoof, thus making split hoofs, and chews the cud, among the animals, that you may eat. 4 Nevertheless, you are not to eat of these, among those which chew the cud, or among those which divide the hoof: the camel, for though it chews cud, it does not divide the hoof, it is unclean to you.

Perhaps, the part that says, "speak to the sons of Israel, saying" might give us an idea that the message was for the sons of Israel, not everybody. No, I guess I'm reading into the text. "sons of Israel is just a generic term for gentile believers in Christ. What was I thinking? y:O2
Oh it was given to Israel alright.. And Christian’s graft into the commonwealth of Israel, Ephesians 2:11-13, 19, Ephesians 3:6, Romans 11:11-24... Remember that G-d made the covenants ONLY between the house of Israel and the house of Judah (Jeremiah 31:31-32, Hebrews 8:6-13) so we better be part of Israel or we are in big trouble...

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:02 pm
by Gman
RickD wrote: G, unless your car doesn't have an internal combustion engine, you're breaking the sabbath law by igniting a fire on the sabbath. Looks like you need to stay home after all. :mrgreen:
Ok now you are turning G-d's laws into legalism... ;) But yes, technically we do our best to limit work as much as we can...

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:38 pm
by RickD
Gman wrote:
RickD wrote: G, unless your car doesn't have an internal combustion engine, you're breaking the sabbath law by igniting a fire on the sabbath. Looks like you need to stay home after all. :mrgreen:
Ok now you are turning G-d's laws into legalism... ;) But yes, technically we do our best to limit work as much as we can...
Ok Gman let's look at legalism:
Legalism

Theology. 1. the doctrine that salvation is gained through good works.
2. the judging of conduct in terms of strict adherence to precise laws. — legalist, n. — legalistic, adj.
You and I both believe that salvation is not gained through works, so let's look at #2.
both you and cheezerrox are judging conduct of believers by adherence to the law, when you say we sin if we don't follow the sabbath laws, and when cheezerrox says we sin if we don't follow Jewish dietary laws. So, who's being legalistic?

Is it possible that the sabbath and dietary laws were given to the nation Israel. And when scripture says that all Israel is not israel, it means that there is s spiritual Israel that is not the same as national Israel? And perhaps this spiritual Israel is the one that gentile believers are a part of?

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:49 pm
by Gman
RickD wrote: You and I both believe that salvation is not gained through works, so let's look at #2.
both you and cheezerrox are judging conduct of believers by adherence to the law, when you say we sin if we don't follow the sabbath laws, and when cheezerrox says we sin if we don't follow Jewish dietary laws. So, who's being legalistic?
Sure... We all sin in many many different ways. And what about the sexual sins too? Is adultery not a sin? Homosexuality? Come now... It's all sin...
RickD wrote:Is it possible that the sabbath and dietary laws were given to the nation Israel. And when scripture says that all Israel is not israel, it means that there is s spiritual Israel that is not the same as national Israel? And perhaps this spiritual Israel is the one that gentile believers are a part of?
I would say that Israel is both Jew and gentile. And it is still currently blind. To itself or identity...

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:57 pm
by RickD
I would say that Israel is both Jew and gentile. And it is still currently blind. To itself or identity...
G, I'm open to the possibility of spiritual Israel being comprised of both Jews and Gentiles. But, the laws we are discussing, were given to the nation of Israel. Not spiritual Israel. Isn't that what scripture means by "Not all Israel are Israel"?

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:04 pm
by Gman
RickD wrote: G, I'm open to the possibility of spiritual Israel being comprised of both Jews and Gentiles. But, the laws we are discussing, were given to the nation of Israel. Not spiritual Israel.


I don't know what you mean by spiritual Israel.. The commandments were given to Israel, Israel was also given a land or nation.
RickD wrote:Isn't that what scripture means by "Not all Israel are Israel"?
I would say just what it means.. Not all that say they are Israel are Israel.. Just like someone who says they are Christian automatically means they are Christian Matthew 7:21..

To be revealed later...

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:14 pm
by RickD
So you don't see a distinction between the nation of Israel and spiritual Israel? So, by that, you would say that gentile believers living in the US for example, are citizens of the nation of Israel?
I would say just what it means.. Not all that say they are Israel are Israel.. Just like someone who says they are Christian automatically means they are Christian Matthew 7:21..
I see that. But if there were no distinction between inhabitants of Israel the nation, and spiritual Israel, then it would be simple to identify true Israel. Those that inhabit, or have inhabited Israel in the past, are true Israel. Do you see what I'm saying?

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:32 pm
by Gman
RickD wrote:So you don't see a distinction between the nation of Israel and spiritual Israel? So, by that, you would say that gentile believers living in the US for example, are citizens of the nation of Israel?
Not on paper.. Or by man's law. So technically no... How G-d calls it, not by ourselves.
RickD wrote:I see that. But if there were no distinction between inhabitants of Israel the nation, and spiritual Israel, then it would be simple to identify true Israel. Those that inhabit, or have inhabited Israel in the past, are true Israel. Do you see what I'm saying?
Yes.. I would say that we don't have or know complete Israel yet. We are still under blindness as recorded in Romans 11:25. Those who are Israel and those who aren't.. Unfortunately I don't know. Maybe assumptions but nothing concrete. I guess we will find out later when the "blank" hits the fan. That is how I see it when true Israel will be revealed. Like in a movie. G-d knows however..

Sorry amigo.. I just don't know.

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:41 pm
by RickD
Even Romans 11:25 makes a distinction between Israel and Gentiles. Israel and believing Gentiles are two branches of one tree. Now, isn't that tree Jesus Christ?

Re: The Law

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:51 pm
by Gman
RickD wrote:Even Romans 11:25 makes a distinction between Israel and Gentiles.
It says until the fullness of the gentiles has come in... Your guess is as good as mine when that is.. I would say however that hasn't come yet.
RickD wrote:Israel and believing Gentiles are two branches of one tree. Now, isn't that tree Jesus Christ?
Hebrew has multiple meanings.. Both spiritual and physical elements. Not just one... Israel however typically is revealed in the form of a tree.. Mark 13:28-31, Hosea 9:10, Jeremiah 24:3-8.

Re: The Law

Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2012 7:23 am
by PaulSacramento
RE: Clean and Unclean foods.
I though Jesus made it clear that the dietary laws were "done away with".
Mark 7:19

Re: The Law

Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2012 7:28 am
by PaulSacramento
As far as the Messiah's words at mark 7:18-19, you have to take into account the context of the conversation. The conversation started when the Pharisees and scribes noticed and pointed out that Yeshua's disciples didn't perform n'tilat yadayim, or the ceremonial washing of hands, before eating, which is still performed by Orthodox Jews today (as told in verses 3-4). Yeshua rebukes them for equating the traditions of men; ie, the rabbinical additions to Torah, with Torah law itself, and even elevating the traditions over Scripture (verses 6-13). Afer this He states that nothing that goes within a man can make him unclean, only what comes out of him. They're not speaking of what's permissible to eat; that would be INCONCEIVABLE to the Pharisees and scribes, and so even if it was Messiah's message, He would need to state it specifically, because they would never assume He would insinuate that un-kosher foods are clean
.
Well, speaking of context:
You are correct that what caused the conversation to start was the unclean hands comment, but...
Jesus replied with text:

‘(H)This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘(I)But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’

and parable:

9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your (K)tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘(L)Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘(M)He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is (N)Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your (O)tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”
The Heart of Man

14 After He called the crowd to Him again, He began saying to them, “Listen to Me, all of you, and understand: 15 there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man. 16 [If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear.”]

And after all that he explained to his followers:
17 When he had left the crowd and entered (P)the house, (Q)His disciples questioned Him about the parable. 18 And He *said to them, “Are you so lacking in understanding also? Do you not understand that whatever goes into the man from outside cannot defile him, 19 because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?” (Thus He declared (R)all foods (S)clean.) 20 And He was saying, “(T)That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. 21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22 deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, (U)envy, slander, pride and foolishness. 23 All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.”


Seems to me that it was a far greater lesson then simply one of "tradition".