Jump to content
IGNORED

IMHO: A big part of understanding Hebrew Roots...


JohnD

Recommended Posts

Jewish

 

Through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them. By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned.

 

By faith the walls of Jericho fell down, after they were compassed about seven days.

 

By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.

 

And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:  Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, Hebrews 11:28-33

 

Roots

 

Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens.

 

Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:

 

And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: Hebrews 11:34-36

 

Who Am I LORD

 

They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;

 

(Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.

 

And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:

 

God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect. Hebrews 11:37-40

 

Even To Stand In The Shadow Of These The Beloved

The Heroes Of My Childhood

I Am Blessed

 

~

 

QUESTION: where is it HISTORICALLY or SCRIPTURALLY required that the Church, which is clearly predominantly Gentile, return its "Hebrew Roots"?

 

I don't need or ask for much, but evidence from the writing of the Early Church (50AD - 300AD) along with the Scriptures ... would suffice. 

 

Without these things, it all seems like a sprinkle of modern day Judaizing to me. 

 

Gnostic even.  In fact ... I've dealt with this many times over the last 20 years. 

 

The opposite is true. 

 

But, it doesn't hurt for elements of "academics" in a scholastic setting, but to try to return the CHURCH to "Hebraic roots" .... absolutely not a requirement or a commandment.

 

~

 

Beloved

 

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; Matthew 1:1-2

 

No Matter Who It May Offend

 

How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him. Acts 10:38

 

My Teachers Are The Forefathers Of Israel; The Sons And Daughters Of Jacob

 

What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. Romans 3:1-2

 

And My LORD And My God

 

And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas, reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. John 20:26-28

 

Is Forever

 

And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust. Romans 15:12

 

A Jew

 

Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.
 

And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
 

But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
 

Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
 

And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour. Matthew 15:21-28

 

And Their KING

 

And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. John 19:19

 

So Should I A Goy (Spit Spit :)) Leave The Jesus Of The Bible

 

As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God. Psalms 42:1

 

To Mock And To Scorn His 

 

When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
 

And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:  And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Matthew 25:31-33
 

Beloved Brothers

 

Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:  For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
 

Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
 

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Matthew 25:34-40

 

And Sisters

 

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
 

For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
 

Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
 

Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Matthew 25:41-49

 

I Trow Not

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,239
  • Content Per Day:  0.86
  • Reputation:   1,686
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  12/26/2013
  • Status:  Offline

QUESTION: where is it HISTORICALLY or SCRIPTURALLY required that the Church, which is clearly predominantly Gentile, return its "Hebrew Roots"?

I don't need or ask for much, but evidence from the writing of the Early Church (50AD - 300AD) along with the Scriptures ... would suffice. Without these things, it all seems like a sprinkle of modern day Judaizing to me. Gnostic even. In fact ... I've dealt with this many times over the last 20 years. The opposite is true. But, it doesn't hurt for elements of "academics" in a scholastic setting, but to try to return the CHURCH to "Hebraic roots" .... absolutely not a requirement or a commandment.

The following post by Q answered your question beautifully. I agree with Q. Try to put yourself living in the time period from 33 ad to 332 AD. If you were a Gentile back then, what was it like? I think your answers will explain what the Hebrew Roots is all about - pre council of nicea, pre Constantine.

I'm curious, why would you follow anything that came out of that council?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,239
  • Content Per Day:  0.86
  • Reputation:   1,686
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  12/26/2013
  • Status:  Offline

Spock,

Just a thought.

It is normative to see NT believers in scripture meeting on the 1ST day of the week for fellowship isn't it? It is almost universally accepted that this is because it is resurrection day of the week. Why could you not fellowship with a solid, Bible teaching, Christ worshiping church group on Sunday, and continue your Sabbath practice and Feast celebration as conscience has dictated? Is there no church body near you that is worth going to in this sort of way? Paul made it abundantly clear that it made no difference what day you choose to worship together, as the Lord is the Lord of every day anyhow! In Hebrews, we are told to gather together much more so often as "we say the Day approaching", which certainly we do. It would not seem like the leading of the Holy Spirit of God to give you a rigid idea of worship days that would keep you from fellowship much more so in this evil day. I know it is totally a matter of your own understanding of things, but just offering a perspective. I appreciate the way you are acting in accordance with your revelation of truth, as you should.

Greetings aj, my dear brother in Christ,

My answer may surprise you, but please accept it without any rebuttal, but rather only to inform you of my thought processes. As you know, I follow my conscience and do what I think is right, not what others think is right for me. We are all different, at different places in our walk, and have unique trials and mountains to climb, so what may be good for you may not be good for me.

The reason why I will not walk into a church on Sunday is simply this-I believe Sunday worship was pagan in its origin; I believe Sunday worship was created on Sunday to be anti-Semitic; and I will not follow anything that came out of the council of Nicea or any Roman council headed by popes. I try to follow in Christ's footsteps and the leading of the Holy Spirit. Neither, I believe, are leading me back to Sunday worship. In fact, I believe I was led out of it.

In addition, while I know the 4th commandment does not reference worship, but merely rest, I choose not to meet on Sunday because it makes me feel like I'm winking at the pagan origins of so much of Christian practices today. FYI, I do not celebrate Easter and Christmas as well. I celebrate Passover and Tabernacles ( the real birth day of Yeshua).

Again, I am not trying to convert you to my way of thinking, so please don't try to convert me to yours.

In love,

Spock

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  327
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   232
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/01/2014
  • Status:  Offline

 

Hi john,

Spock thinking out loud-

It has recently occurred to me Jesus may never have intended to start a new religion-Christianity.

But I can't reconcile it all. I know God was angry at the Jewish leaders for their rejection of Christ, but does that mean this is why a new religion or two sprung up?

Let me get this straight:

1. God ordains Saturday as the day of rest

2. Constantine and ecumenical council change it to Sunday

3. When Jesus returns, it will go back to Saturday.

So why do most believers have it on Sunday?

Hmmmmm

Many questions, few answers for me.

 

God did ordain the 7th day as the day of rest. I say the 7th day because Saturday does not exactly coincide since biblical days start at sunset so the 7th day starts at sunset on Friday.

 

As far as Constantine and the first council of Nicea, Constantine wanted to separate from Judaism, so set things up so that belief in Jesus and the holy days did not coincide with the holy days of Judaism. This especially effected the timing of Passover vs. the timing of Easter. However, historically, believers in Jesus were already gathering on the 1st day, Sunday, so the day of gathering for Christians had not really changed. 

 

The Sabbath, as you said, according to the Mosaic law, is a day of rest. One mistake of many who support a Sabbath worship service, is that scripture never ever commanded a 7th day worship service, but did command a 7th day rest. Going back to the OT, the children of Israel were alloted land based on tribe. The Temple, the formal place for sacrifice and worship, was simply too far away for most of the people to travel for Sabbath worship services. Since the command was to rest, most would have stayed home.

 

Throughout the book of Acts and the New Testament we continue to see the apostles and the early believers, Jewish and Gentile, meet at the synagogue for the readings from Moses and the Prophets.  Acts 13:13.  Paul clearly addresses the men of Israel and the Gentiles who worship the one true G-d of Israel.  Throughout Acts, Gentiles are clearly connected to the synagogue and to the Sabbath.  The Gentiles joined themselves to the one true faith, leaving their idolatrous, sexually perverted, unclean pantheism.  When they got together on the first day of the week, beginning Saturday at sundown, they met for a different purpose.  There they collected money for the poor, fellow-shipped, sang songs and had a teaching, (akin to a Midrash).  The Sunday gathering was not to be considered a replacement for the day of rest.

 

G-d established the day of rest from the beginning and blessed the day, thousands of years before the Torah.  Set apart special from all other days.  Even the alien, foreigner (Goyim = non-Jew) and even the animals were to be given a day of rest and not allowed to work. Ex.23:12.

 

Based on the established importance of the Sabbath from the beginning, the practice by the Jews who were to be a light to the nations and bring them to faith in the one true G-d, the practice by our Messiah, the apostles, and the early believers we need to re-evaluate our consideration of the seventh day of primary importance.  Throughout Acts the faith was constantly referenced as a sect of Judaism known as "The Way".  The term "Christian" was simply the Greek word used to describe this sect as followers of the Messiah. 

 

Based on the history of the church during the 2nd to 3rd century, and the pulling away from Judaism, the church fathers demanding to do away with anything that was Jewish in form or celebration, then replacing the day of worship with Sunday (worship of the Sun God) and the replacement of G-d's appointed times that are forever, we need to question how important are these days.

 

In Acts 15, the Jerusalem Council knew it would be very difficult for a Gentile to suddenly dropped their cultural demands and take on the teaching of the faith.  James advised that they not make it difficult for the Gentile coming to the faith.  Therefore they listed 4 demands that would clean up the Gentile and allowed them to get close enough to a Jew to learn.  That is why the last sentence states "For Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.  The Gentile would move in to the synagogue and would learn the faith.  As they learn, then they would exchange their idolatrous ways for the ways of the true faith.

 

The addition of synagogues with Rabbis is not in scripture, and happened during the Babylonian exhile. So, to here the scriptures being read, during Jesus time, people went to the synagogue. Jesus went to the synagogue, not because of any command, but to preach to the people. The disciples also went to synagogues, not because of any command but to share the gospel, and often, Christians would gather the day after the Sabbath, 'Sunday', to have a more private meeting, discussing more Christian topics.

 

Since services on the Sabbath, are not a command, there is no need to have services on the Sabbath. Judaism today, has worship/prayer services 7 days a week. In reality, most synagogues are open and having services more often then Christian churches. Since services are not and have never been tied to the Sabbath, and worship occured 7 days a week in the Temple, and 7 days a week in synagogues, to limit services to one or two days a week, is not biblical. But, having services on any day of the week is not against bible. In otherwords, having services on Sunday, Wednesday, or Thursday, does not violate any command but is fine.

 

The question then is not about services, which many including Constantine confused as having to do with the Sabbath. It is about a day of rest. No where in the NT are New Covenant believers commanded to rest on the Sabbath, or on any other day. New Covenant believers are told to rest in the Messiah. Those who received the Mosaic covenant are commanded to rest on the 7th day, but those who received the New Covenant are not commanded to rest an a specific day of the week. So, Jesus did intend to bring in a New Covenant, which is not the same as the Mosaic covenant. Given that the covenants are different, the practice, or obedience to the differing covenants is different. Had the nation/people of Israel accepted the New Covenant, Judaism would include Jesus, but since Israel as a nation, rejected Jesus, there are two differing religions.      

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,239
  • Content Per Day:  0.86
  • Reputation:   1,686
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  12/26/2013
  • Status:  Offline

Q said this-

No where in the NT are New Covenant believers commanded to rest on the Sabbath, or on any other day. New Covenant believers are told to rest in the Messiah. Those who received the Mosaic covenant are commanded to rest on the 7th day, but those who received the New Covenant are not commanded to rest an a specific day of the week. So, Jesus did intend to bring in a New Covenant, which is not the same as the Mosaic covenant. Given that the covenants are different, the practice, or obedience to the differing covenants is different. Had the nation/people of Israel accepted the New Covenant, Judaism would include Jesus, but since Israel as a nation, rejected Jesus, there are two differing religions.

Spock's musings:

I told you I would get back with you. Sorry it has been a week. Been very busy at work.

Here are some areas we differ my friend:

I hold the words of the Old Testament equal to the New Testament. I do not believe I have to look for a command ONLY from the New Testament to be applicable today. In addition, I do not believe the New covenant has REPLACED the Old. I believe it has RENEWED IT, not replaced it. (Matt 5 will be cited later)

I believe the day of rest, like shar said, began before Moses and has not been altered. Just because this day may not be mentioned as a command in the NT means nothing to me. Jesus attended synagogue and he lived in the NT so that means something. And of course the book of acts continually reminds us of how the early believers met in the synagogue on Saturday (day of rest/worship).

I agree the 4th commandment does not specify a day of worship, but rather a day of rest, but when you work six days a week, as I do, usually your day of rest will include your worship time. I understand you do not believe the Ten Commandments are applicable for gentile believers today being a part of the mosaic covenant, so I guess we differ on this one too.

Matthew 5 shouts at me and if I error, I choose to error on the literal side of its interpretation: The following words Jesus spoke restrain me from stating the moral law is no longer applicable and need not be followed. Of course, this is how I see it and apply the passage. ( What you or anyone else do is up to you.)

17“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

One final note-I believe you said before Constantine it was the norm for gentile believers to have their day of rest/worship on Sunday. I'm not sure about this. My research of church history has not revealed this fact.

But what I do know is this-the day of rest/worship officially was changed at the council of Nicea with Constantine's urgings. This, I cannot and will not follow. Again, for me, it is a matter of following the traditions of man vs. the word of God.

Spock out

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  327
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   232
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/01/2014
  • Status:  Offline

 

Nice historical analysis neb,

The issue as I see it that I had to ponder and reflect upon is that transition you mentioned, is it God ordained or rather, is it pleasing to God for me to accept?

For example-

Worship on Sunday. I believe it came from the sun God worship. Didn't sound very attractive to me, so should I accept or reject?

The origin of Easter and Christmas - also did not sound God inspired too, but rather more pagan rooted. Why would I follow that?

What exactly are the implications of a new covenant? Does that mean throw away everything that is Jewish?

What is the relevance of Acts 15, the Jerusalem Council?

Is the old covenant gone for good? When did they go? Will those early practices be reinstated? Are the Ten Commandments only old covenant stuff for Jews only or are they universal for all time?

Are the sabbath Feasts only for Jews? Do they have an implication for latter times?

What does it mean to be grafted into Israel?

Did Christ or any apostle encourage or advocate a new religion? Who did encourage this break? Was it somebody I believe is a spokesperson for God?

WWJD. Does the life of Christ give me any indication of how I should live my life? Did he model things for me, or was he merely being a good Jew?

Many many more issues to wrestle with (for me at least). Still haven't resolved and I doubt I ever will to my satisfaction. (What else is new for me?)

For me, much to consider and if you know me, I do not accept anything just because tradition says this is the way it is or because it's been done for many hundreds of years. In fact, I'm suspicious of practically EVERYONE. lol

 

Just for a potentially different view and opinion.... variety maybe. 

 

I am a Messianic Jew, so maybe I see this different.

 

There are 3 main Messianic Judaism organizations in the U.S. The MJAA (largest) and the UMJC (second largest), plus the AMC (smaller). While there are differences, particularly between the AMC and the other two, no Messianic Judaism organization believes that Gentiles are required to keep the Sabbath or the Feasts. 

 

Then there is a variety of predominantly Gentile groups which take the title of Messianic, such as Two House, or One law, which do say that Gentiles are required to keep the Sabbath and the Feasts. So, if you go to a Messianic synagogue which says Gentiles have to keep the law, it is likely Two House and/or One law theology. (One Law theology says that there is one law for Jew and Gentile, and of course, they interpret that law to be the Mosaic law).

 

The Mosaic law was given to the children of Israel, for their entire lives and for all generations of Jewish people, so in my view, a child who is born Jewish, is born under the Mosaic covenant. They remain obligated for their entire lives, or until they accept Jesus, coming under the New Covenant.

 

In the Mosaic law, most of the law is commanded to the Jewish people. The law is very specific about who does what. Most of the law did not take effect until the children of Israel entered the promised land. Some Gentiles lived with the Jewish people in the land of Israel, and some Gentiles were just passing thru, on business or visiting. The Mosaic law specifically says which subset of laws apply to Gentiles living in the land and to those passing thru. An obvious one is, thou shall not murder applies to any who is in the land of Israel, Jew, Gentile in residence, or Gentile passing thru.

 

There is no Mosaic law addressed to Gentiles who do not reside and are not currently in the land of Israel. There are laws in the OT, which are not a part of the Mosaic law.

 

Ok, so directly speaking, unless you live in the land of Israel, you are not required to do any of the Mosaic law. If you live in the land of Israel, there currently is no Temple, so some laws can not be kept,,, but, there are laws which state Gentiles ( not ritually circumcised) are not to do. Gentiles living in the land of Israel were to keep a subset of the Sabbath laws, but were not to partake of the Passover lamb, ever.

 

In the NT, Jesus celebrated Passover at the last supper, and changed the meaning as a pointer to Him also. Since He is the lamb, The Lamb is no longer forbidden to Gentiles. I call this Passover the NT Passover, and is available for Gentiles to join in.

 

In the future, the millenium, it is clear that Succoth will be celebrated and be a requirement, but at that point, I believe Succoth will have been 'fulfilled' and now point to what the Messiah has done, the final ingathering, which involves all believers. But even non-believers in the millenium will be required to go up to Jerusalem according to scripture in the OT.

 

I do not believe Gentiles are grafted into Israel. I believe Gentiles are grafted into the Messiah/Messianic promises. The idea of grafting comes from Romans 11. In Romans 11, there are two trees. The native tree and the wild tree. Gentiles are wild branches who are grafted into the native tree. But the emphasis is that Gentiles are branches. Israel are native branches, most cut off from the native tree. Again the emphasis is on Israel being branches. Israel is not the tree, but is branches, mostly cut off. If Gentiles were grafted into Israel, they would be grafted into branches, most of which have been cut off. That doesn't make sense. All who are saved are grafted into the tree and receive nourishment from the roots. The tree is the promises, which means the Messianic promises.           

 

Paul clearly states in Romans 11:17 that the Gentiles are "grafted in".  I lived in Miami and I remember my grandmother had a large mango tree.  She loved mangoes and their many varieties.  She would go to her neighbors who would give her a tender shoot from one of their branches and graft that tender shoot into her large mango tree.  The tender shoot got everything it needed from the existing tree to grow and bear its own fruit.  Each season she would harvest the most of a single variety from the main tree, but enjoyed other varieties from the shoots that had been grafted in.

 

This is what Paul is getting at.  The Gentiles, who did not know G-d, have been grafted in.  The reference he uses is "you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others.  He states a few branches have been broken off to accommodate this, not most.  Now consider, he says, you do not support the root, the root supports you.  Now, because of your faith, you are grafted in.  Paul states earlier in Romans 9, that regarding Israel, theirs is the adoption as sons, theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship, the promises, the patriarchs, and the ancestry of Christ.  This is the complete root system of the tree from which the Gentile gets it nourishment and the ability to bears it own unique fruit without becoming it own separate tree.  One faith, One L-rd, One Baptism.

 

The Gentile, coming into this new faith, will need their hand guided to learn of all this and to partake in it, hence the ruling from the Jerusalem Council.  The Gentile is now of Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise in Christ.  Paul further states in Romans 3 ,  Do we nullify (void, do away with) the law by this faith.  G-d forbid, Not at all.  Rather, we uphold the law.  Yeshua was very clear, as stated in Matthew 5, He did not come to abolish the law and the law will not disappear until all from the Law is accomplished and that will not be until heaven and earth disappear.  ( a reference to the new heaven and earth) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  20
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  2,875
  • Content Per Day:  0.71
  • Reputation:   1,336
  • Days Won:  9
  • Joined:  03/13/2013
  • Status:  Offline

Q said this-

No where in the NT are New Covenant believers commanded to rest on the Sabbath, or on any other day. New Covenant believers are told to rest in the Messiah. Those who received the Mosaic covenant are commanded to rest on the 7th day, but those who received the New Covenant are not commanded to rest an a specific day of the week. So, Jesus did intend to bring in a New Covenant, which is not the same as the Mosaic covenant. Given that the covenants are different, the practice, or obedience to the differing covenants is different. Had the nation/people of Israel accepted the New Covenant, Judaism would include Jesus, but since Israel as a nation, rejected Jesus, there are two differing religions.

Spock's musings:

I told you I would get back with you. Sorry it has been a week. Been very busy at work.

Here are some areas we differ my friend:

I hold the words of the Old Testament equal to the New Testament. I do not believe I have to look for a command ONLY from the New Testament to be applicable today. In addition, I do not believe the New covenant has REPLACED the Old. I believe it has RENEWED IT, not replaced it. (Matt 5 will be cited later)

I believe the day of rest, like shar said, began before Moses and has not been altered. Just because this day may not be mentioned as a command in the NT means nothing to me. Jesus attended synagogue and he lived in the NT so that means something. And of course the book of acts continually reminds us of how the early believers met in the synagogue on Saturday (day of rest/worship).

I agree the 4th commandment does not specify a day of worship, but rather a day of rest, but when you work six days a week, as I do, usually your day of rest will include your worship time. I understand you do not believe the Ten Commandments are applicable for gentile believers today being a part of the mosaic covenant, so I guess we differ on this one too.

Matthew 5 shouts at me and if I error, I choose to error on the literal side of its interpretation: The following words Jesus spoke restrain me from stating the moral law is no longer applicable and need not be followed. Of course, this is how I see it and apply the passage. ( What you or anyone else do is up to you.)

17“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

One final note-I believe you said before Constantine it was the norm for gentile believers to have their day of rest/worship on Sunday. I'm not sure about this. My research of church history has not revealed this fact.

But what I do know is this-the day of rest/worship officially was changed at the council of Nicea with Constantine's urgings. This, I cannot and will not follow. Again, for me, it is a matter of following the traditions of man vs. the word of God.

Spock out

 

Thanks for your response. At this time I want to correct only one thing.

 

You said 'One final note-I believe you said before Constantine it was the norm for gentile believers to have their day of rest/worship on Sunday. I'm not sure about this. My research of church history has not revealed this fact.'

 

Maybe a misunderstanding, but no, I did not say that. I said that it was the norm for Jews and Gentiles to meet together on the 1st day, to worship, discuss what had occurred in synagogues on Saturday, as well as what occurred the previous days. The 1st day gathering was for believers only. I never said the 1st day was a day of rest, but rather a day for the gathering of believers only, to discuss, teach and worship based on belief in the Jesus.

 

I have also said that there were areas of Gentile believers, which had no Jewish people, so there would not have been synagogues in those areas. It would be inacurate to make a general statement that all Messianic Gentiles went to synagogues as there simply were no synagogues in all areas where there were Gentile believers.

 

The Sabbath was mentioned in Genesis as a day the God rested from His work of creation. It is not mentioned as a day of rest for people until Exodus, when it was commanded of the children of Israel, so there is no command to any people prior to the command given to the children of Israel. The command to the children of Israel is uniquely called a sign to the children of Israel, as are all the sabbaths which are commanded.

 

Finally, the New Covenant is not a 're-newed covenant'. The Hebrew word translated as 'new' is an adjective, which only means new. In Hebrew, a common set of three consonants can be used in words which are nouns, adjectives and verbs, etc. The formation or grammar of the word signifies whether the word is a noun, adjective or verb. The verb with the three root consonants can and often does have a different meaning then the adjective with the same three consonants. I know this might be confusing, but One Law theology uses the word translated as 'New' and actually claims it means renewed. The verb form can mean re-newed but the adjective never means renewed, only new. One Law uses this mistranslation of Hebrew to justify saying the New Covenant is actually the Mosaic covenant, with the Messiah. Unfortunately for them, that is only a poor understanding of basic Hebrew grammar which results in a bad translation.

 

 

 

     

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,239
  • Content Per Day:  0.86
  • Reputation:   1,686
  • Days Won:  6
  • Joined:  12/26/2013
  • Status:  Offline

Thanks Q,

I apologize for misquoting you. Me bad.

As for renewed covenant vs. new covenant, I will forward your info to my rabbi for his benefit. He spent a lot of time preaching about this a few years back and he insisted the translation was for a RENEWED covenant. Honestly, I didn't keep his notes on this topic. (Dissecting Hebrew or Greek is not an interest of mine so maybe someone else can take this ball and run with it. I'm more of a big picture guy. Ha)

Nevertheless, I still hold that the "old" law is good to go until the Heaven and earth pass away.

Shalom my friend,

Spock

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  327
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   232
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/01/2014
  • Status:  Offline

 

Q said this-

No where in the NT are New Covenant believers commanded to rest on the Sabbath, or on any other day. New Covenant believers are told to rest in the Messiah. Those who received the Mosaic covenant are commanded to rest on the 7th day, but those who received the New Covenant are not commanded to rest an a specific day of the week. So, Jesus did intend to bring in a New Covenant, which is not the same as the Mosaic covenant. Given that the covenants are different, the practice, or obedience to the differing covenants is different. Had the nation/people of Israel accepted the New Covenant, Judaism would include Jesus, but since Israel as a nation, rejected Jesus, there are two differing religions.

Spock's musings:

I told you I would get back with you. Sorry it has been a week. Been very busy at work.

Here are some areas we differ my friend:

I hold the words of the Old Testament equal to the New Testament. I do not believe I have to look for a command ONLY from the New Testament to be applicable today. In addition, I do not believe the New covenant has REPLACED the Old. I believe it has RENEWED IT, not replaced it. (Matt 5 will be cited later)

I believe the day of rest, like shar said, began before Moses and has not been altered. Just because this day may not be mentioned as a command in the NT means nothing to me. Jesus attended synagogue and he lived in the NT so that means something. And of course the book of acts continually reminds us of how the early believers met in the synagogue on Saturday (day of rest/worship).

I agree the 4th commandment does not specify a day of worship, but rather a day of rest, but when you work six days a week, as I do, usually your day of rest will include your worship time. I understand you do not believe the Ten Commandments are applicable for gentile believers today being a part of the mosaic covenant, so I guess we differ on this one too.

Matthew 5 shouts at me and if I error, I choose to error on the literal side of its interpretation: The following words Jesus spoke restrain me from stating the moral law is no longer applicable and need not be followed. Of course, this is how I see it and apply the passage. ( What you or anyone else do is up to you.)

17“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

One final note-I believe you said before Constantine it was the norm for gentile believers to have their day of rest/worship on Sunday. I'm not sure about this. My research of church history has not revealed this fact.

But what I do know is this-the day of rest/worship officially was changed at the council of Nicea with Constantine's urgings. This, I cannot and will not follow. Again, for me, it is a matter of following the traditions of man vs. the word of God.

Spock out

 

Thanks for your response. At this time I want to correct only one thing.

 

You said 'One final note-I believe you said before Constantine it was the norm for gentile believers to have their day of rest/worship on Sunday. I'm not sure about this. My research of church history has not revealed this fact.'

 

Maybe a misunderstanding, but no, I did not say that. I said that it was the norm for Jews and Gentiles to meet together on the 1st day, to worship, discuss what had occurred in synagogues on Saturday, as well as what occurred the previous days. The 1st day gathering was for believers only. I never said the 1st day was a day of rest, but rather a day for the gathering of believers only, to discuss, teach and worship based on belief in the Jesus.

 

Paul's missionary journeys hit all major cities in the Roman Empire and all those cities had synagogues.

 

I have also said that there were areas of Gentile believers, which had no Jewish people, so there would not have been synagogues in those areas. It would be inacurate to make a general statement that all Messianic Gentiles went to synagogues as there simply were no synagogues in all areas where there were Gentile believers.

 

The Sabbath was mentioned in Genesis as a day the God rested from His work of creation. It is not mentioned as a day of rest for people until Exodus, when it was commanded of the children of Israel, so there is no command to any people prior to the command given to the children of Israel. The command to the children of Israel is uniquely called a sign to the children of Israel, as are all the sabbaths which are commanded.

 

Finally, the New Covenant is not a 're-newed covenant'. The Hebrew word translated as 'new' is an adjective, which only means new. In Hebrew, a common set of three consonants can be used in words which are nouns, adjectives and verbs, etc. The formation or grammar of the word signifies whether the word is a noun, adjective or verb. The verb with the three root consonants can and often does have a different meaning then the adjective with the same three consonants. I know this might be confusing, but One Law theology uses the word translated as 'New' and actually claims it means renewed. The verb form can mean re-newed but the adjective never means renewed, only new. One Law uses this mistranslation of Hebrew to justify saying the New Covenant is actually the Mosaic covenant, with the Messiah. Unfortunately for them, that is only a poor understanding of basic Hebrew grammar which results in a bad translation.

 

Q, your lesson in Hebrew to Spock would be valid if the text of the NT was written in Hebrew.  However, it was written in Greek.  In Matthew 26:28, the word "new" is not found in all the manuscripts.  Several translations, like the New Revised Standard, NIV, etc.  do not show this word in Matthew or Mark.  In some translations, the word "new" was added, and probably copied from Luke.

 

But looking at the word "new" in Luke, the word translates in Greek as "kaine diatheke" which can be rendered "renewed covenant".  This translation for the word "new" means renewed or new in respect to quality and implying superiority.  It does not denote new as in the respect of time or lack of development.  The Greek word for that would have to be "Neos", which was not used.

 

The superiority and renewal of the covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah is the promise given to them in Jere. 31:30-33.  That through Yeshua all mankind is blessed by the provision of the final and permanent atonement for sin and by promising that the Holy Spirit will write the Torah on the heart of anyone with faith.

     

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  0
  • Topics Per Day:  0
  • Content Count:  327
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   232
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  01/01/2014
  • Status:  Offline

 

Q said this-

No where in the NT are New Covenant believers commanded to rest on the Sabbath, or on any other day. New Covenant believers are told to rest in the Messiah. Those who received the Mosaic covenant are commanded to rest on the 7th day, but those who received the New Covenant are not commanded to rest an a specific day of the week. So, Jesus did intend to bring in a New Covenant, which is not the same as the Mosaic covenant. Given that the covenants are different, the practice, or obedience to the differing covenants is different. Had the nation/people of Israel accepted the New Covenant, Judaism would include Jesus, but since Israel as a nation, rejected Jesus, there are two differing religions.

Spock's musings:

I told you I would get back with you. Sorry it has been a week. Been very busy at work.

Here are some areas we differ my friend:

I hold the words of the Old Testament equal to the New Testament. I do not believe I have to look for a command ONLY from the New Testament to be applicable today. In addition, I do not believe the New covenant has REPLACED the Old. I believe it has RENEWED IT, not replaced it. (Matt 5 will be cited later)

I believe the day of rest, like shar said, began before Moses and has not been altered. Just because this day may not be mentioned as a command in the NT means nothing to me. Jesus attended synagogue and he lived in the NT so that means something. And of course the book of acts continually reminds us of how the early believers met in the synagogue on Saturday (day of rest/worship).

I agree the 4th commandment does not specify a day of worship, but rather a day of rest, but when you work six days a week, as I do, usually your day of rest will include your worship time. I understand you do not believe the Ten Commandments are applicable for gentile believers today being a part of the mosaic covenant, so I guess we differ on this one too.

Matthew 5 shouts at me and if I error, I choose to error on the literal side of its interpretation: The following words Jesus spoke restrain me from stating the moral law is no longer applicable and need not be followed. Of course, this is how I see it and apply the passage. ( What you or anyone else do is up to you.)

17“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

One final note-I believe you said before Constantine it was the norm for gentile believers to have their day of rest/worship on Sunday. I'm not sure about this. My research of church history has not revealed this fact.

But what I do know is this-the day of rest/worship officially was changed at the council of Nicea with Constantine's urgings. This, I cannot and will not follow. Again, for me, it is a matter of following the traditions of man vs. the word of God.

Spock out

 

Thanks for your response. At this time I want to correct only one thing.

 

You said 'One final note-I believe you said before Constantine it was the norm for gentile believers to have their day of rest/worship on Sunday. I'm not sure about this. My research of church history has not revealed this fact.'

 

Maybe a misunderstanding, but no, I did not say that. I said that it was the norm for Jews and Gentiles to meet together on the 1st day, to worship, discuss what had occurred in synagogues on Saturday, as well as what occurred the previous days. The 1st day gathering was for believers only. I never said the 1st day was a day of rest, but rather a day for the gathering of believers only, to discuss, teach and worship based on belief in the Jesus.

 

I have also said that there were areas of Gentile believers, which had no Jewish people, so there would not have been synagogues in those areas. It would be inacurate to make a general statement that all Messianic Gentiles went to synagogues as there simply were no synagogues in all areas where there were Gentile believers.

 

The Sabbath was mentioned in Genesis as a day the God rested from His work of creation. It is not mentioned as a day of rest for people until Exodus, when it was commanded of the children of Israel, so there is no command to any people prior to the command given to the children of Israel. The command to the children of Israel is uniquely called a sign to the children of Israel, as are all the sabbaths which are commanded.

 

The exodus from Egypt included many other people, gentiles that went with them. Ex.12:38.  The Law was given to the Jews as the guardians and it was their duty to be the light to the Gentiles.  The other people of the nations were present at the reading of the Law.  When the covenant was renewed at Mt. Ebal, Joshua gathered all of Israel, aliens and citizens alike.  These aliens with them were attaching themselves to the one true G-d of Israel.  Joshua read all the law, there was not a word Moses had commanded that Joshua did not read.  The Sabbath was part of that reading.

 

G-d states in Is. 56:6 - All goyim (gentiles, foreigners), who bind themselves to the L-rd to serve him, to love the name of the L-rd, and worship him, all who keep his Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to my covenant, these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. 

 

Finally, the New Covenant is not a 're-newed covenant'. The Hebrew word translated as 'new' is an adjective, which only means new. In Hebrew, a common set of three consonants can be used in words which are nouns, adjectives and verbs, etc. The formation or grammar of the word signifies whether the word is a noun, adjective or verb. The verb with the three root consonants can and often does have a different meaning then the adjective with the same three consonants. I know this might be confusing, but One Law theology uses the word translated as 'New' and actually claims it means renewed. The verb form can mean re-newed but the adjective never means renewed, only new. One Law uses this mistranslation of Hebrew to justify saying the New Covenant is actually the Mosaic covenant, with the Messiah. Unfortunately for them, that is only a poor understanding of basic Hebrew grammar which results in a bad translation.

 

 

 

     

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...