|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 28, 2019 17:51:28 GMT -8
That makes sense according to Ecclesiastes 3, a time for war and a time for peace. I'm not sure how that ties into surrender though. The only surrender I see people doing biblically, who are pleasing to G-d, is surrendering themselves to His will. I guess we just have to really know His will.
I believe we will be held accountable for not stepping up to defend those who are vulnerable, exploited, and in some cases killed according to government policies from abortion to the holocaust. How we do that depends on the situation and the ability G-d gives us to act, but if we never even open our mouths against it.... now its politically correct to agree the holocaust was atrocious, but at the time it really mattered, it was the opposite so only very few did.
Ultimately, in all moral and ethical issues not directly involving ourselves, we have a choice to protect ourselves or defend what's right. The problem is everyone thinks they know what's right, but fortunately we have G-d so we can know. Love neighbor as yourself is really perfect when you think about it.
We don't all have the same opportunity to influence and intervene, but even that gets iffy because it could be the result of not stepping up as G-d lead you. I've learned if I'm acting in fear, I'm outside G-d's will.
In the least, we do have to speak the truth gently to those who bring it up and exercise whatever power we do have in the matter. Often, that's just speaking. It can be hard to disagree with people, but if that's the only influence we have, then I guess that's what he's given us. I don't beat people over the head, but I do point out truth even if it's only on a secular level and the conversation is not spiritual ......no that body mutilated and discarded was not theirs and what about that person's right to one day choose. Let it choose the value of its own life for the sake of fairness and equality...
It's not biblical, but sometimes these things come up with friends who know my beliefs, but they're not interested or ready for the deeper spiritual issue. Anything you can say to help people question the lies and choose rightly is better than saying nothing. But it can be hard to disagree, especially with people you actually get along with who are trying to be good people. That's what's so dangerous about not calling wrong, wrong. People are getting more and more confused and truly don't know right from wrong. We're over our head in sin, and the unsaved but well intending are trying to make sense of it. They can't, so we'll be responsible for a lot more than we realize if we act out of fear and we can at least fight the lies and confusion. Its scary because we're being made out as the evil ones as society "progresses".
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 28, 2019 19:05:33 GMT -8
I can't get much beyond salt and light in Marthew 5 having to do with covenant - salt can't lose its flavor, but in terms of the salt with the sacrifices, for G-d it can be tasteless or useless. We become useless in terms of G-d's will to if we give into worldly pressures, fears, and weakness. So it's speaking about sincerity in faith and a life showing a covenantal relationship with Him.
In context, comparing us to lights of the world and rejoicing over persecution like the prophets, it's talking about us setting ourselves apart from the world, not going along with it.
I'm not sure I'm on topic. I'm trying to clarify my understanding of what's being discussed.
(After reading this through more thoroughly)
I think I understand what's being discussed a bit more.
Should Barabbas have lead an insurrection or waited on Messiah who was chosen by G-d to save the people and foretold to come at that time?
Maybe the goat for Azazel and Barabbas are examples of those who rely on self rather than submitting to G-d somehow.
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on May 28, 2019 21:08:07 GMT -8
I can't get much beyond salt and light in Marthew 5 having to do with covenant - salt can't lose its flavor, but in terms of the salt with the sacrifices, for G-d it can be tasteless or useless. We become useless in terms of G-d's will to if we give into worldly pressures, fears, and weakness. So it's speaking about sincerity in faith and a life showing a covenantal relationship with Him. Its' becoming tasteless and useless due to our going along with the world would be analogous to its being poluted or contaminated. The worse the contamination the moe tasteless it becomes. That's one aspect of being light. But when we tell people the true meaning of scripture, give insights into interpreting scripture, standing against anti-Semitism, standing with conservative politicians being harassed in a restaurant, or any number of things would be a light. All of them, as Rush puts it will "shine the light of truth on America!" You're fine. He should have accepted Yeshua as HaMoshiach, found some Nazarenes and joined in their studies. And from there he should have done whatever HaShem called him to do. The one representing Barabbas could typify that. But the one for Azazel was either for a demon, or represents Yeshua Himself. Or possibly something completely different. That's the main point of discussion. Good discussion! Dan C |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 29, 2019 5:02:46 GMT -8
The wording seems to suggest it was "to" something, not just representing something. If it represents Yeshua then the goat to Azazel would have lived, therefore representing Yeshua's triumph over evil. If the goat died and stayed dead; I think it can't be representative of Yeshua.
If it died and stayed dead, then maybe it represents the choices between life and death. Then we could see it's not G-d sharing His glory with evil. It's Him using evil against itself to preserve good. Those who choose death and die in their sin are given over to evil by G-d just in separating thrm out and therefore preserving what is good. Either in choosing life or death, His will is done. The truth is there is death so it's a matter of what He does with it based on our choice, but both ultimately lead to His will and life.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on May 29, 2019 7:50:09 GMT -8
Should Barabbas have lead an insurrection or waited on Messiah who was chosen by G-d to save the people and foretold to come at that time? That is the central issue being discussed. Jesus told Peter to put up his sword after cutting someone’s ear off. He also did not call 10,000 angels to his rescue. This was because it was not time for war. It was time for surrender and preservation of life. When Jesus returns, it will be time for war. Since we no longer have the Urin and Thummim to determine when to war and not war as Saul and David did, we must turn to scripture for examples to determine when to war and not to war. We should not dismiss Biblical examples because we think it only applies to one person, situation or time. All scripture is for doctrine, reproof and instruction in righteousness. When surrender preserves life, as Jerimiah told Zedikiah his surrender would do, surrender is the correct course of action. There are ample examples in the Bible when wars were fought that should not have been. There also ample examples of when wars were not fought that should have been. Essentially we are discussing the concept of “justifiable war”. One extreme is pacifists, like Jehovah Witnesses, Quakers, and Ana-Baptist who say one should never participate in war and the other extreme is patriotism, like Catholics, and Baptist, who say you fight when the government tells you to fight. Both are dead wrong. WWI is an example of a war that the US entered due to Patriotism. WWII is an example of a war the US delayed entering due to pacifists. The war that Jefferson fought with the Barbary Coast Pirates is an example the US fighting a Justifiable war at the right time. |
|
|
|
Post by alon on May 29, 2019 11:34:04 GMT -8
The wording seems to suggest it was "to" something, not just representing something. If it represents Yeshua then the goat to Azazel would have lived, therefore representing Yeshua's triumph over evil. If the goat died and stayed dead; I think it can't be representative of Yeshua. If it died and stayed dead, then maybe it represents the choices between life and death. Then we could see it's not G-d sharing His glory with evil. It's Him using evil against itself to preserve good. Those who choose death and die in their sin are given over to evil by G-d just in separating thrm out and therefore preserving what is good. Either in choosing life or death, His will is done. The truth is there is death so it's a matter of what He does with it based on our choice, but both ultimately lead to His will and life. Goats do not get resurrected, so once the goat dies the analogy must stop. Therefore the goat that was to die in the wilderness outside the city could still be prophetic of Yeshua. He carried our sins (both the goat and Yeshua), so even the discussion of whether it was Yeshua or a goat going to a demon is relevant. Sacrifices were never supposed to be made to demons in Judaism. But an interesting picture comes up with both the goat and Yeshua taking those sins and telling ha'satan "Here, I believe these were yours." Just a random thought. The word "to" is in the English translation: Leviticus 16:10 (CJB) But the goat whose lot fell to ‘Az’azel is to be presented alive to Adonai to be used for making atonement over it by sending it away into the desert for ‘Az’azel.
It's common in English to say a lot fell "to" something or someone. In the interlinear the terms are ַליהוה l'YHVH, to or for YHVH and ַלעזאזל l’azazel, to or for Azazel. So we're not sure what the l' means, to or for; and the meaning of Azazel has been lost. So what if azazel is not a name, but a thing. An offering for sin perhaps. Or judgement: עז used twice, so the mighty one with power and authority emphasized, then the suffix el designating God. Dan C |
|
|
|
Post by alon on May 29, 2019 12:06:13 GMT -8
Essentially we are discussing the concept of “justifiable war”. One extreme is pacifists, like Jehovah Witnesses, Quakers, and Ana-Baptist who say one should never participate in war and the other extreme is patriotism, like Catholics, and Baptist, who say you fight when the government tells you to fight. Both are dead wrong. WWI is an example of a war that the US entered due to Patriotism. WWII is an example of a war the US delayed entering due to pacifists. The war that Jefferson fought with the Barbary Coast Pirates is an example the US fighting a Justifiable war at the right time. Very true. But in the case of insurrections the longer you wait the more advantage the government or occupying force has. However move too soon and you won't have enough popular support. Timing is everything. But should you have an insurrection in the first place? The biblical answer is unequivocally "sometimes." As you say, we learn the principles and concepts to guide us in answering that question "should we" by studying the Bible. But you still cannot use one instance as a blanket commandment, yea or nay. Insurrection itself is not wrong, but insurrection for its own sake is absolutely wrong. Should Barabbas have continued as an insurrectionist? Like I said, he should have grabbed the nearest Nazarene and begged to be told about Yeshua, then let God lead him. And as you allude to, the timing was wrong then. There is more than one way to resist, and this was a time to use Roman roads, Roman protection from raiders, pirates, and invading armies, and the ability to relocate to spread the gospel. God Himself used later insurrections to cause the diaspora where the sect of the Nazarenes was scattered over the Roman world, the good news going with them. I can't say that those who opposed Rome by violent means were wrong. They at times acted wrongly, as when R Akiva declared Bar Kochba to be the Messiah and all Nazarenes were forced out of the rebellion. That cost the Jews the war, and also caused the final rift between the Nazarene sect and the rest of Judaism. But that was used by God also to set those Nazarene Jews apart; to sanctify His people. Wars are vile things, and win or lose he consequences are heavy to bear. But submission to evil is far worse. I won't condemn anyone who opposes evil governments. But war, especially insurrection is not to be entered into lightly. However once war is decided an option, saving lives is by the nature of the act not the highest consideration. If the alternative is to bow to Ba'al, then I prefer insurrection to just letting them kill me for refusing to go along. Probably the residual Baptist in me, as you said. Dan C |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on May 29, 2019 14:11:27 GMT -8
Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were officers in an evil government yet they didn't submit to the evil act required of them by the government nor did they rebel.
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on May 29, 2019 14:47:41 GMT -8
Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah were officers in an evil government yet they didn't submit to the evil act required of them by the government nor did they rebel. Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah- Shadrach, Mishac, and Abednigo. The nation was still weak from the conquest and relocation, so the time was wrong for any type of uprising.These men served the pagan king, yet when told they must bow to the statue of Nebachednazzer they resisted! They would not do it, even though the penalty was a very unsavory death. This is exactly the kind of thing we are discussing. There are many ways to resist, and a time for this kind of resistance as opposed to fighting a war you cannot win. Dan C |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 29, 2019 16:13:11 GMT -8
I don't know about the goat. I see it to a point, but the fact it is cut off from G-d is where I get concerned. If as a testimony to evil, G-d let it live, I could see it more confidently.
In terms of wars and insurrections, I tend to agree with Jimmie. I don't think we're called to organize as a group for a physical war. We are, however, called to sacrifice ourselves for the wellbeing of others. Sometimes it may mean fighting. I think that's an exception though, and if G-dly, it is never done in the interest of self. Sometimes it means sacrificing yourself, but I don't think that's the same thing as surrendering. Yeshua never surrendered for example. He exercised faith so that's different than surrendering as surrendering implies giving up.
I think overcoming evil is going to occur very individually until Yeshua returns, as based on my understanding, it's the Jewish remnant that fights that war lead by Him.
We fight the personal, spiritual, internal one illustrated in His first coming as His followers. I don't see in prophecy an opportunity for us to do otherwise. We're not foretold to make some great stand against evil in this world. We're foretold to be killed by it, and a few have to raptured out of it. It's our faith that overcomes evil in the world, so I don't see a physical war being what we're called to but a spiritual one.
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on May 29, 2019 21:08:55 GMT -8
I don't know about the goat. I see it to a point, but the fact it is cut off from G-d is where I get concerned. If as a testimony to evil, G-d let it live, I could see it more confidently. In terms of wars and insurrections, I tend to agree with Jimmie. I don't think we're called to organize as a group for a physical war. We are, however, called to sacrifice ourselves for the wellbeing of others. Sometimes it may mean fighting. I think that's an exception though, and if G-dly, it is never done in the interest of self. Sometimes it means sacrificing yourself, but I don't think that's the same thing as surrendering. Yeshua never surrendered for example. He exercised faith so that's different than surrendering as surrendering implies giving up. I think overcoming evil is going to occur very individually until Yeshua returns, as based on my understanding, it's the Jewish remnant that fights that war lead by Him. We fight the personal, spiritual, internal one illustrated in His first coming as His followers. I don't see in prophecy an opportunity for us to do otherwise. We're not foretold to make some great stand against evil in this world. We're foretold to be killed by it, and a few have to raptured out of it. It's our faith that overcomes evil in the world, so I don't see a physical war being what we're called to but a spiritual one. You may not be called to participate in an insurrection, and I'm to old now to do so. But we should support those who are called. Barabbas and others in the 1st cen were not doing that for selfish reasons. They did it because their people could not worship as God intended when ruled by an occupying pagan army. That is noteworthy, selfless, and honorable. And the prophecy exemption does not hold up to scrutiny either. Go back to 30 September 1938, when Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Neville Chamberlain held up the infamous "White Paper" where Adolf Hitler promised Great Britain "Peace for our time." And England as well as the US and the rest of the world gave in not to Hitler, but to the pacifists in our own countries. And the rest is history. Millions upon millions dead, because the pacifists held sway and allowed him to grow stronger. Let's be clear here, the blood of everyone killed in WWII is on the hands of he pacifists. Oh, hey blame the "Hawks" in government and he military. But it was all them. And the rest may be history, but you don't know about it. We almost lost that war to Japan. The country was growing tired of war and the continued sacrifices they had to make on the "home front," that place where the pacifists stayed. Seeing this, they got active again calling for an end to the war. And their movement was gaining ground. Their efforts also undermined the drives for rubber, steel, war bonds and other activities in support of those who went to fight. We won that one, but these reprobate filth grew into the liberal insanity we now deal with. My point is that radical pacifism which says "Jesus didn't tell me to fight abortion" or any of the other issues we face is far worse than the true warmonger who will bomb a clinic or fight at the drop of a hat. They are far more insidious and dangerous. You're a mom and a Messianic trying to do this on your own. I get that. And no, you are probably not going to be called to pick up a rifle and fight. Like I said, I'm too old and stove up to do so as well. But others may, people you know. What will you do when the government comes and asks if you know anyone in the rebellion should it come to that? Will you bend the knee to Molech and tell them? When they need food, temporary shelter, or money will you turn them away? There was no prophecy saying "go and fight Hitler." And likely there will be no prophecy saying "Arm yourselves and stand against Sharia Law in the US as Islam takes over." And in places they already are. They are also finding armed to the teeth camps where terrorists and jihadists train. And right now we are once again bending to the will of the pacifists. "Maybe if we ignore them they won't hurt us." Bull! They will kill every one of us at the first opportunity because we chose a Jewish form of faith. What I am saying is that we may not be the ones called to fight when the time comes. But we should never abandon those who do. They should be honored and respected; supported and protected. And we should become part of the popular support base they will depend on. Otherwise what kind of country will you be leaving those kids? Goat/man or not, Barabbas was a hero, any way you cut it. Dan (the Shamamite) C |
|
|
|
Post by alon on May 29, 2019 21:57:29 GMT -8
Just another note on this. We are not the first or the smartest folks to have this discussion. RabbiHillel was a serious believer in the idea ha'moshiach would be Moshiach ben Yoseph, the Suffering Servant of Isiah 53. The last of the famous "Pairs" or rabonim, his counterpart was Rabbi Shammai, who believed ha'moshiach would come as Moshiach ben'Dovid, king, conquerer, and eternal leader of His people. Under Him the Jews would throw off the Roman yoke and worship in truth forever. When a Shamamite argued with a Hillelite over this, the Hillelite typical responded "Get behind me ha'satan." This is recorded in rabbinical literature of that time.
But even the arch pacifist Hillel once told his talmidim that sometimes they should just get out of the way and let the Shamamites do what needed to be done.
Neither extreme will work. But if you've already decided that under no circumstances should there be war or insurrection then you place yourself in the extreme position.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 30, 2019 3:55:12 GMT -8
I don't know about the goat. I see it to a point, but the fact it is cut off from G-d is where I get concerned. If as a testimony to evil, G-d let it live, I could see it more confidently. In terms of wars and insurrections, I tend to agree with Jimmie. I don't think we're called to organize as a group for a physical war. We are, however, called to sacrifice ourselves for the wellbeing of others. Sometimes it may mean fighting. I think that's an exception though, and if G-dly, it is never done in the interest of self. Sometimes it means sacrificing yourself, but I don't think that's the same thing as surrendering. Yeshua never surrendered for example. He exercised faith so that's different than surrendering as surrendering implies giving up. I think overcoming evil is going to occur very individually until Yeshua returns, as based on my understanding, it's the Jewish remnant that fights that war lead by Him. We fight the personal, spiritual, internal one illustrated in His first coming as His followers. I don't see in prophecy an opportunity for us to do otherwise. We're not foretold to make some great stand against evil in this world. We're foretold to be killed by it, and a few have to raptured out of it. It's our faith that overcomes evil in the world, so I don't see a physical war being what we're called to but a spiritual one. You may not be called to participate in an insurrection, and I'm to old now to do so. But we should support those who are called. Barabbas and others in the 1st cen were not doing that for selfish reasons. They did it because their people could not worship as God intended when ruled by an occupying pagan army. That is noteworthy, selfless, and honorable. And the prophecy exemption does not hold up to scrutiny either. Go back to 30 September 1938, when Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Neville Chamberlain held up the infamous "White Paper" where Adolf Hitler promised Great Britain "Peace for our time." And England as well as the US and the rest of the world gave in not to Hitler, but to the pacifists in our own countries. And the rest is history. Millions upon millions dead, because the pacifists held sway and allowed him to grow stronger. Let's be clear here, the blood of everyone killed in WWII is on the hands of he pacifists. Oh, hey blame the "Hawks" in government and he military. But it was all them. And the rest may be history, but you don't know about it. We almost lost that war to Japan. The country was growing tired of war and the continued sacrifices they had to make on the "home front," that place where the pacifists stayed. Seeing this, they got active again calling for an end to the war. And their movement was gaining ground. Their efforts also undermined the drives for rubber, steel, war bonds and other activities in support of those who went to fight. We won that one, but these reprobate filth grew into the liberal insanity we now deal with. My point is that radical pacifism which says "Jesus didn't tell me to fight abortion" or any of the other issues we face is far worse than the true warmonger who will bomb a clinic or fight at the drop of a hat. They are far more insidious and dangerous. You're a mom and a Messianic trying to do this on your own. I get that. And no, you are probably not going to be called to pick up a rifle and fight. Like I said, I'm too old and stove up to do so as well. But others may, people you know. What will you do when the government comes and asks if you know anyone in the rebellion should it come to that? Will you bend the knee to Molech and tell them? When they need food, temporary shelter, or money will you turn them away? There was no prophecy saying "go and fight Hitler." And likely there will be no prophecy saying "Arm yourselves and stand against Sharia Law in the US as Islam takes over." And in places they already are. They are also finding armed to the teeth camps where terrorists and jihadists train. And right now we are once again bending to the will of the pacifists. "Maybe if we ignore them they won't hurt us." Bull! They will kill every one of us at the first opportunity because we chose a Jewish form of faith. What I am saying is that we may not be the ones called to fight when the time comes. But we should never abandon those who do. They should be honored and respected; supported and protected. And we should become part of the popular support base they will depend on. Otherwise what kind of country will you be leaving those kids? Goat/man or not, Barabbas was a hero, any way you cut it. Dan (the Shamamite) C This strikes me as harsh and not really fairly characterizing what I said, or what I think I understood Jimmie saying. We said there's a time to fight and a time not to fight and the response, in my mind, depends on individual and situational circumstances. I went on to explain that I believe our overall calling as followers in Yeshua at this time is to be ready to die for our witness. That's the example He set for us and the prophecy we have. Meanwhile, I come from a military family. My grandpa faught in Normandy for example, and though it destroyed his life in a lot of ways, I was raised to be really proud of him for that. And I am, so I do understand and appreciate those who defend and step up. I don't personally see much happening now culturally heading in any sort of comparably good direction. I think we have to be really careful as time moves on as there's just not going to be that much good left to align with, and I don't think we should expect to look like victors in the world's eyes. I think we need to prepare for the opposite. Also, we don't have enough information about Barabbas to call him a hero, but the Bible uses the words insurrection, murderer and bandit in describing him. I know there's issues with translations and the words chosen, but I don't really hear him being characterized as you are describing so I'm just not comfortable making the same conclusions. In the least, he walked away and let an innocent man die without protesting so I'm wary. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on May 30, 2019 5:42:31 GMT -8
[Goat/man or not, Barabbas was a hero, any way you cut it. Dan (the Shamamite) C Luke tells us that Barabbas was in prison for Sedition – meaning he was a leader of the insurrection. What become of his followers? I believe Luke also provides the answer: Luke 23: 39And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. 40But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? 41And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. Since you have sainted Barabbas, I just wanted to know if you would saint the two malefactors also. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on May 30, 2019 5:46:34 GMT -8
[This strikes me as harsh and not really fairly characterizing what I said, or what I think I understood Jimmie saying. We said there's a time to fight and a time not to fight and the response, in my mind, depends on individual and situational circumstances. I agree. |
|
- there are 70 faces to 
