|
Post by alon on May 15, 2015 0:53:47 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by alon on May 15, 2015 12:48:47 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by john75 on Oct 24, 2015 7:21:35 GMT -8
Salvation was the same for Jews under the Old Covenant(s) as it is for us under the Renewed Covenant. I would extend what you said. Salvation is the same for all under the covenant. Lev 24:22 Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for one of your own country: for I am the LORD your God. Since being a non-Messianic Jew implies unbelief that Yeshua is God, the redeemer, then they are unsaved. I am uncomfortable with the idea that all non-Messianic Jews who do not believe in IAUSHUO are not saved. Don't you think there may be some sincere Jews (and non-Jews) who have not had the opportunity to truly know and understand our Savior but faithfully follow God to the best of their understanding, can still be redeemed? I believe this is the same for obeying all of God's Law. Some have been misled but sincerely obey what they know. I believe God's grace and the redemptive power of our redeemer still reaches law abiding them. I also believe God has many methods of revealing truth, which if rejected, lead a person to destruction. Yeah lets be real, the Brit Chadashah annoys me immensely, as it preaches lawlessness in many places. Paul then takes the message away from Israel and directs it at the greek? No wonder Jews dont want to know. To any law abiding Israelite, (or simply Israelite) 'christianity' seems like a lawless free for all, and it is. If only some would stop favouring the Talmud over .
|
|
|
Post by john75 on Oct 24, 2015 7:31:12 GMT -8
THis is why i'm deeply skeptical of pauls writings being from one source. I hear what youre saying Dan, these writings sometimes speak for the law, but often they speak against observance. And vehemently so too.
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 24, 2015 9:42:24 GMT -8
Yeah lets be real, the Brit Chadashah annoys me immensely, as it preaches lawlessness in many places. Paul then takes the message away from Israel and directs it at the greek? No wonder Jews dont want to know. To any law abiding Israelite, (or simply Israelite) 'christianity' seems like a lawless free for all, and it is. If only some would stop favouring the Talmud over . THis is why i'm deeply skeptical of pauls writings being from one source. I hear what youre saying Dan, these writings sometimes speak for the law, but often they speak against observance. And vehemently so too. Moderator note: We've dealt with this problem of Paul and the B'rith Chadashah before. Yet you keep throwing out these accusations, but with no specifics which we can answer like repetition will make it so. Please give specific problems you have, in their proper sub-forum and we'll help. However repeating the charges over and over is teaching against scripture. From the forum rules:
8. We believe that the books of B'resheet (Genesis) to the book of Revelation to be the inspired word of God. Therefore, all authority when discussing spiritual matters will be decided by the words contained in these books and is the basis for discussion taking place on the forum. Any teaching that attempts to invalidate these books of the Bible as being the authoritative inspired word of God will not be acceptable here on the forum.
Further posts such as this will result in a warning and possibly cancelation of your account if you persist.
Also note that we do not hold Talmud as being over . Neither are we Christians in the sense of being of their churches or following their doctrines. These too you should address in their proper place if you have questions.
Please respond by PM if you have questions or comments about this post rather than clutter the open forum.
Dan C
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 24, 2015 10:22:17 GMT -8
... If only some would stop favouring the Talmud over . Let's talk about this a moment. I don't think anyone here holds the Talmud over . It is simply commentary on (the TNK). However one of the things hamoshiach was supposed to do was explain better. And this is exactly what Yeshua HaMoshiach did. It is also what the Apostles did after Him. Obviously not all they did, but mostly. So in a sense, the Ketuvai Shalachim plus the recorded words of Yeshua are simply an addition to the Mishna (first part of the Talmud). It's also part of scripture now, so it has more impact than just the Talmud. However, most of what Yeshua said is straight out of the Mishna anyhow. So not everything in the Talmud is wrong, any more than everything Matthew Henry wrote is wrong. Some, yes. But there is also some good understanding there.
Some Non Messianic Jewish sects, most notably the Ultra Orthodox, do hold Talmud above the TNK because, according to them, you cannot understand scripture properly without this commentary. Obviously, they do not think the B'rith Chadasha is part of the Talmud- and before anyone goes off on me, we do NOT have our own Talmud ... (the Jerusalem Talmud, The Babylonian Talmud, and the Los Angeles Talmud ... that'd just not right!).
This just came up at discussion last night, and is something to think about. A different perspective.
Dan C
|
|
|
Post by john75 on Oct 24, 2015 11:50:58 GMT -8
... If only some would stop favouring the Talmud over . Let's talk about this a moment. I don't think anyone here holds the Talmud over . It is simply commentary on (the TNK). However one of the things hamoshiach was supposed to do was explain better. And this is exactly what Yeshua HaMoshiach did. It is also what the Apostles did after Him. Obviously not all they did, but mostly. So in a sense, the Ketuvai Shalachim plus the recorded words of Yeshua are simply an addition to the Mishna (first part of the Talmud). It's also part of scripture now, so it has more impact than just the Talmud. However, most of what Yeshua said is straight out of the Mishna anyhow. So not everything in the Talmud is wrong, any more than everything Matthew Henry wrote is wrong. Some, yes. But there is also some good understanding there.
Some Non Messianic Jewish sects, most notably the Ultra Orthodox, do hold Talmud above the TNK because, according to them, you cannot understand scripture properly without this commentary. Obviously, they do not think the B'rith Chadasha is part of the Talmud- and before anyone goes off on me, we do NOT have our own Talmud ... (the Jerusalem Talmud, The Babylonian Talmud, and the Los Angeles Talmud ... that'd just not right!).
This just came up at discussion last night, and is something to think about. A different perspective.
Dan CSorry you misunderstand me i was referring to our Hasidic brethren on that comment. Ive also heard that about the ultra orthodoxes saying there is no clear Law, i mean what a . They study it so much and say there is no clear law? The commandments are so clear its possible to see where something has gone awry.
|
|
|
Post by mordecai on Jul 6, 2018 20:59:41 GMT -8
The old covenant was made at Mount Sinai when the children of Israel said that they would do the Ten Commandments. The new covenant was given in Eden when Eve was told that her seed would bruise the serpent's head. This may sound odd since the new covenant was given before the old. However, remember that the timing dependend on not when it was given but when it was ratified with blood. The old covenant was ratified right away by the blood of an animal sacrifice at Sinai. However, the new covenant was ratified by Jesus Himself at the Cross and presented in a more perfect Sanctuary not made by man's hands but by God's in heaven after he rose from the dead.
Old Covenant: Do my Commandments and then you will be perfect and I will dwell in you Demonstration: Passover Nisan 13 = day that Jews were circumcised = covenant Nisan 14 = getting rid of all leven (perfection) Leven is taken out and burned before 12 noon Nisan 15 = eating of the Lamb (Christ inside of you)
New Covenant: Let me dwell in you and I will transform you to keep my commandments. Demonstration: Final Passover in 31 AD Nisan 13 = Simon's Feast Nisan 14 = Christ's passover dinner (Christ inside you) - Judas leaves and hangs himself before 12 noon - all leven removed
|
|
|
Post by alon on Jul 7, 2018 8:28:46 GMT -8
Interesting perspective on the ratification of the covenants. So the so called "New Covenant" (which most of us here refer to as the "Renewed Covenant") is really the older covenant, now ratified! On the people accepting the Ten Commandments: Exodus 20:18-19 (ESV) Now when all the people saw the thunder and the flashes of lightning and the sound of the trumpet and the mountain smoking, the people were afraid and trembled, and they stood far off and said to Moses, “You speak to us, and we will listen; but do not let God speak to us, lest we die.”
The above was said right after the Lord spoke the Ten Commandments from the mountain. However they were accepting the entire (most of it as yet unheard). That is the popular view among most Jews and Christians, one of the few things they agree on. Am I reading you right that you think they only accepted the Ten Commandments? Dan C
|
|