I have already told you - ALL of Torah is Torah. Whatever of it is yours to do, that DO.
Except for the parts that you say don't apply. I am sorry, but that appears to me to be nothing but a useless tautology. Have you ever had a client who says, "just make it work!" And you say, "what do you want it to so, specifically?" And they say, "Whatever you can make it do, then make it do that." Utterly unusable. You know I'm right. That's the nightmare client, and we've both had him (or her), I'm sure. The project bogs down again and again because you can never get the client to commit to a specific and detailed reality. Those are the projects that are guaranteed to fail. Guaranteed. Walking in, you know you'll get paid and fail anyway. I don't take on those projects, and I studiously avoid those clients when I can.
But here the stakes are eversomuch higher. We are talking about eternal consequences. Eternity in Hell at worst, or perhaps "merely" failure to please God as a believer. Based on a specification that amounts to saying, "Whatever, just do Torah, whatever that is."
Well no. If that's the pitch, I'm sticking with the New Contract, which really is new because it's different from the Old Contract. We die to the law when we become believers in Christ, because we follow Him in death, and in resurrection, and so pass out from under the law:
Rom 7:4-6 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. (5) For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. (6) But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.This is Torah for the New Covenant believer, to have faith in Christ, and be renewed by the Spirit, being filled with His love and all manner of spiritual fruit, which the Old Covenant had no power to do:
Heb 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.New wine and old wine skins do not mix. But you are in effect teaching the old wine skins are incorporated into the new wine skin, in direct contradiction to the explcit teaching of Christ. The New Covenant Torah is the royal law of love. We are done with the training wheels. How odd it would be to see an adult riding around with training wheels, proclaiming to everyone he met that we should all go back to using training wheels. But for everything there is a time and season, and there comes a time to internalize your sense of balance and set those training wheels aside.
Mat 19:7-8 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? (8) He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.God can change His own law respecting worship:
1Ch 28:11-20 Then David gave to Solomon his son the pattern of the porch, and of the houses thereof, and of the treasuries thereof, and of the upper chambers thereof, and of the inner parlours thereof, and of the place of the mercy seat, (12) And the pattern of all that he had by the spirit, of the courts of the house of the LORD, and of all the chambers round about, of the treasuries of the house of God, and of the treasuries of the dedicated things: (13) Also for the courses of the priests and the Levites, and for all the work of the service of the house of the LORD, and for all the vessels of service in the house of the LORD. (14) He gave of gold by weight for things of gold, for all instruments of all manner of service; silver also for all instruments of silver by weight, for all instruments of every kind of service: (15) Even the weight for the candlesticks of gold, and for their lamps of gold, by weight for every candlestick, and for the lamps thereof: and for the candlesticks of silver by weight, both for the candlestick, and also for the lamps thereof, according to the use of every candlestick. (16) And by weight he gave gold for the tables of shewbread, for every table; and likewise silver for the tables of silver: (17) Also pure gold for the fleshhooks, and the bowls, and the cups: and for the golden basons he gave gold by weight for every bason; and likewise silver by weight for every bason of silver: (18) And for the altar of incense refined gold by weight; and gold for the pattern of the chariot of the cherubims, that spread out their wings, and covered the ark of the covenant of the LORD. (19) All this, said David, the LORD made me understand in writing by his hand upon me, even all the works of this pattern. (20) And David said to Solomon his son, Be strong and of good courage, and do it: fear not, nor be dismayed: for the LORD God, even my God, will be with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee, until thou hast finished all the work for the service of the house of the LORD.The pattern of the new temple service was given to David directly from the Lord, to be built by Solomon, but it abrogates the pattern of the wilderness tabernacle, which was also Torah, given explicitly and in great detail. Set aside just like that. Because the Lawgiver declared it so, due to a change in circumstances.
Luk 24:44-49 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. (45) Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, (46) And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: (47) And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. (48) And ye are witnesses of these things. (49) And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.Peace,
Hmmm... hint of British Israelism maybe? WWCOG being channeled here? And as theories go, is about as speculative as it gets. No grounds for obligation visible there.
No. While I am familiar with British Israelism [BI], It is the Biblical precept that interests me... More 'Two House' Messianic than BI. If one is not aware of the continuing distinction between the two houses of Israel through the OT and into the new, one is missing half of what is being told. That Ephraim was sown as seed is important. That Ephraim was never pardoned, never given mercy, never brought home, is also vitally important, because YHWH declares He will remarry her (the wife called the House of Israel, distinct from the House of Judah). How He can do so (without breaking His own law) is one of the major conundrums left unresolved - Judah doesn't know how that happened, and neither do the Christians - Even though, IMHO, the Christians are the product thereof.
[roamer_1:] Right... which ratifies within itself the Mosaic covenant, and every other covenant there before.
No, that's not a ratification.
Yes, it is.
Principle of mutual exclusion. You can't have a new contract that is fundamentally replacing the old and recapitulating the old at the same time, especially when we know from Jesus Himself the two are NOT compatible.
There it is - Paul's logic bomb.
In contract law, to bring all the terms of a previous agreement forward you would need an incorporation clause. Matthew 5:17 is a sunset clause issued during the last days of the Old Covenant, so its not even part of the New Covenant per se.
Then none of the words of Yeshua himself are part of the 'new covenant' either. That would be an absurdity, would it not? You contend that the 'sunset clause' has occurred, and the Torah is terminated, yet all of Torah and the prophets are not yet fulfilled... How then can the sunset clause have been reached? Indeed, the prophets AND Torah predict the Millenial Kingdom, and beyond - So how then can they be fulfilled? Focus only upon the Davidic Covenant - How much of that needs yet to be accomplished? If you study it, you will be amazed at that which must still come to pass.
Furthermore, even if one granted the premise of continuity past the terminus of the sunset clause (which makes no sense), the applicable parties under the full rigor of Moses are still just God and national Israel, those named in the Old Covenant contract, and only for as long as the individual provisions in question remain unfulfilled. That's not the contract Christians are under.
Indeed it must be, as this 'new' covenant is made with 'the House of Israel and the House of Judah' (notice the distinction again). Gentiles are grafted into that covenant, else they have *no* covenant. There isn't any other.
(Sidebar here: This is why it is critical to define Torah to painful detail. Prophecy is not legal code. Unfulfilled prophecy has no bearing on whether the legal provisions foreshadowing Christ were fulfilled. Everything we are debating about was fulfilled in Christ. To prove that wrong, you would have to define Torah more exactly than you have so far.)
I see what you are saying, but that is much harder to suss out than you might imagine, as ALL of Torah is prophetic. Everything we are debating was, or will be fulfilled in Messiah - Not all has been accomplished. That is the point. Take ONLY the Holy Days and study them. It will soon become apparent that the spring feasts have been fulfilled in an incremental and amazingly exact way in the first coming, death, and resurrection. But the Fall Feasts remain to be accomplished, and no doubt will be accomplished at the second coming, and that, with the very same incremental accuracy which was presented in the fulfillment of the Spring Feasts. This alone confounds your position as declared immediately above: The legal code is, in and of itself, prophetic. What now?
and furthermore, the prophets necessarily reveal the purpose of the legal code - Something declared prophetically is no less law - Take the Inheritance, as an example. What YHWH has explicitly declared within the Inheritance must necessarily come to pass, and therefore, has the force of law in a prophetic sense - This is no small thing, especially as it touches Ephraim (the House of Israel). In a programmatic sense, it MUST execute in order to complete (fulfill) the entirety.
Do not forgo the principle of 'two witnesses'... The Word and the Prophets are intricately intertwined - It is the very signature of YHWH.
[roamer_1:] No, I don't... All I can do is tell you - If you don't do anything about it, that's your business.
Yes you do. Paul and much in the New Covent specification says we are free of the Old Covenant to the extent it foreshadowed Christ.
Again, Paul's logic bomb. Try operating under this premise: Paul cannot go against the Words of his Master, and Paul MUST be saying the very same thing as his fellows... There is only ONE Gospel. Reconcile Paul to John, and to James particularly. They are all three saying the same thing, from different aspects, just as the Gospels are all saying the same thing from different aspects.
And every time Paul says we are free from the law, he always immediately ties it back to the idea that the freedom we have as Christians should *not* be considered license... Are we free to sin? Of course not! And since 'sin' is transgression of Torah...
If you want to convince me, you need to tell me what this "easy" Torah is because I don't see it. I see a law which, while itself good and reflective of the goodness of the divine nature, puts me in the position of death and eternal doom. The New Covenant undoes that, because as I identify with Christ in His death, I die to the law. The law no longer condemns me. It can't. I'm dead to it, and alive to God.
Right. Messiah removes the curses of the law. But we are continually being made in his image - His example to us shows us what that looks like. We, as disciples are to 'walk in his footsteps' - A strange phrase, that. I wonder where it comes from (heh... not really. I know where it comes from). So we are no longer doomed. We can earnestly try and try again... Keep trying to walk in his footsteps.
[roamer_1:] Why then have the Jews been able to keep Torah for the last two thousand years?
But they haven't. God took away the sacrifice and now no one can keep Torah under Moses.
That isn't the point. Second Temple Jews lived as far away from Jerusalem as Holland and Spain - Many, no doubt, may have only seen the Temple once in their whole life, if that. What you seem to be reading into the law is not nor has it ever been a feasible interpretation.
No one gave the rabbis permission to just say, "oh well, let's just be nice now instead of sacrifice." That's a unilateral man-generated modification to the law of the contract.
So was the synagogue system. It is not specified in Torah. Yet Yeshua endorsed it. Used it. Preached from it. It's Rabbinical basis was relied upon by all the Apostles. That system was the fall-back necessary for those who could not make it to Temple at least since the Babylonian exile. What then? A second Temple era Jew, living in the south of France, too poor to go to Temple three times a year (not to mention every Sabbath), was just bound for hell even if he was devout in other aspects? What of Ruth? What of Esther? No, this sense that Christians have of what the law does and what it is for is wholly their own invention.
It voids the contract. Furthermore, the Jewish religion still rejects God's Messiah. Is that compatible with Torah observance? They have retained a form of godliness, but have forsaken the power of God.
Funny, as I could say the very same thing about the vast majority of Christendom.
I respect Jewish people as individuals, as I would any other people. But I do not see them keeping Torah properly. Not at all.
Neither do I see them keeping Torah 'properly'. No one but Yeshua has ever kept it 'properly'. But yet they do their best to keep it as best as they can. And the devout always have.
No, there are principles of statutory interpretation involved here that are as ancient as law itself. I have heard repeatedly from the HR community that the explicit statements of the law are immutable. That's false. The law of the sacrifice is explicitly stated, is it not? Yet it is not only mutable, it can be cast aside as nothing when the inconvenience of a missing temple is encountered.
It is not mutable. But they (Jews) have relied upon grace through faith, even as the Christians do - It is a Torah principle:
A devout man, never missing a single Temple pilgrimage, becomes too old to travel... Even though he has done his best through his whole life, he is doomed because the very long life that YHWH has blessed him with makes him too frail to keep Torah, as he desires? And his son, who is still in his prime, stays home to care for his ailing father... He too is doomed? Which is more important? Making it to the feast, or honoring his father? What of those who lived far away? what of those who were slaves? All of them, doomed? No, accommodations have to be made, and those are made within Torah. See if you can find them out. It isn't the contract. It is your reading thereof.
In addition, as a matter of statutory interpretation, if you have a complete, interdependent system, with no specific provision for severing parts of the law out of "inconvenience," then that entire statutory construct must stand or fall as a whole. There is a rational reason for this. You cannot impose rules for individuals that cannot be supported by the full infrastructure.
But that's just it - the infrastructure does allow - It must. This is part of the same mindset that always figures Israel to be agrarian and small - not taking into account her maritime capabilities... not taking into account her colonies. I know it is dreadfully difficult to shake the traditional view you have been raised in, but the job of Israel, from the first, was to spread Torah to the world. How can that be done if everyone has to stay in walking distance to the Temple? Unfortunately, Israel wound up becoming insular anyway, which is why they didn't bear much fruit.
It isn't about the sons of Abraham. It's about the sons of Adam.
[roamer_1:] I have already told you - ALL of Torah is Torah. Whatever of it is yours to do, that DO.
Except for the parts that you say don't apply. I am sorry, but that appears to me to be nothing but a useless tautology.
Any more so than 'love God and love your neighbor'? What does that mean? If you want to talk about a lack of specificity, there is far less ground for you to stand upon than I.
Well no. If that's the pitch, I'm sticking with the New Contract, which really is new because it's different from the Old Contract. We die to the law when we become believers in Christ, because we follow Him in death, and in resurrection, and so pass out from under the law: Rom 7:4-6 [...]
Careful now, with Romans 7 - You will note that he is speaking to those who know Torah. You cannot take it out of a Torah context.
This is Torah for the New Covenant believer, to have faith in Christ, and be renewed by the Spirit, being filled with His love and all manner of spiritual fruit, which the Old Covenant had no power to do:
How can that possibly fail to resemble Torah?
New wine and old wine skins do not mix. But you are in effect teaching the old wine skins are incorporated into the new wine skin, in direct contradiction to the explcit teaching of Christ. The New Covenant Torah is the royal law of love. We are done with the training wheels. How odd it would be to see an adult riding around with training wheels, proclaiming to everyone he met that we should all go back to using training wheels. But for everything there is a time and season, and there comes a time to internalize your sense of balance and set those training wheels aside.
That would necessarily imply that you personally had used the training wheels in the first place. The training wheels are there to help you get your internal balance - You seem to imply that training wheels are not needed at all, even to someone who knows nothing and is just starting to ride a bike.
And the analogy is good - because once you have internalized what the training wheels teach you, you are not going to fall down any more. Because even yet, you are not to sin, and sin is transgression of the law of YHWH.
This is possible and does NOT offend God, because God can change His own law. For example, according to Jesus, divorce was alien to Torah before Moses, but was permitted under Moses because of the hardness of human hearts:
It was not needed from the beginning - Of course it wasn't. That isn't to say that just in the days of Moses it became necessary.
God can change His own law respecting worship:
[...]
The pattern of the new temple service was given to David directly from the Lord, to be built by Solomon, but it abrogates the pattern of the wilderness tabernacle, which was also Torah, given explicitly and in great detail. Set aside just like that. Because the Lawgiver declared it so, due to a change in circumstances.
That isn't true- like with the covenants, one incorporated into the next, the Tabernacle is incorporated into the Temple. The Temple is an expansion of, not an abrogation of, the Tabernacle.
In the New Covenant we learn that the two greatest commandments are to love God with everything we've got and love our neighbor as we love ourselves, that the law in fact is fulfilled in these two commandments. This love we also learn is made possible, not by the dead letter of the Mosaic law, but by the spirit of Christ living within us, which life of the Spirit is only possible precisely because we have died to the law in Christ and been raised in newness of life, with the great principles of the law written on our heart, just as Jeremiah prophesied. To go back under that lesser law from which Jesus has set us free is open defiance of the New Covenant Torah. It is disobedience to Christ, who has fulfilled the law on our behalf, and satisfied the all the terms of the sunset clause, allowing us to live in the light of the New Covenant:
So then the 'NEW LAW', looking *nothing* like Torah, is written on the heart - What good then was Torah EVER? In what way is it the 'training wheels' you speak of? When YHWH spends three quarters of the Book saying to keep his Torah, to not do as the heathens do, to not do their religious rites and say they are for Him... That he HATES what they do, and what their rites remind him of... Showing us HIS way, teaching us HIS Holy Days, saying all of that is FOREVER and for everyone...
But now, in the 'NEW LAW' we are free to do exactly what He spent so much time telling us *not* to do - Christmas, and Easter, and Sunday Sabbath (if any Sabbath) are now good, and written on our hearts. That just simply makes no sense at all.