Are the 10 Commandments called "the moral law"?

[Resurrection Priest]

1 hour ago, Billiards Ball said:

Do you, today, expect Gentile Christians to convert to Judaism, so that they are allowed in religious synagogues to obey to hear Moses each and every Saturday?!

Simple answer:  No. 

Much as I like Nehemia Gordon, and I've learned a lot from him, he doesn't believe in Yeshua as the Christ.  He just tries to separate from all the Oral Torah traditions.

Galatians 4:9,10  “But how after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage? You observe days and months and seasons and years.”

The recipients of Paul’s letter had come to believe in Jesus as Messiah.  But then they had been taken in by “the circumcision” - the party of converted Pharisees.

The message of the “Judeizers” was that converted Gentiles must become Jews, in order to be right with God (Acts 15:1).  Those who believed their message, had themselves circumcised, and began observing all of the Hebrew festivals in the “old” way, with the offering of animal sacrifices at Jerusalem,  in order to be saved.

“Tell me,” Paul wrote, “you who desire to be under the law [to be justified by the sacrifices prescribed in the Law]” (Gal. 4:21). 

Knowing Paul’s target audience, we can assume that the  “days, and months, and seasons, and years” refer to the prophetic “Feasts of the LORD” commanded in Leviticus chapters 23 and 25, and Numbers chapters 28 and 29.  

        Sacrifices were required for every appointed Feast day (1Chron 23:31), on the Sabbath, the New Moon.  Every Israelite male was required to appear before the LORD in Jerusalem for the appointed Feasts - three times in the year (Deut. 16:16).  And physical circumcision was required before a male could observe the Passover (Exo. 12:48) or even enter the Temple court.  

        Paul was adamant that we are saved by faith in Christ - not by “works of the law” [the old sacrificial remedy].  Keeping the Jewish festivals in order to be saved would be no better than observing pagan astral festivals in order to live forever.  Both involved a type of salvation by works, and so Paul termed it a return to “weak and beggarly elements.”

        NOTE: Paul himself stayed away from Jerusalem for some 14 years.  He finally returned there, and even presented animal sacrifices.  He wrote,“to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law” (1Cor. 9:20 NKJ).  Paul did not regard himself as “under the law”.  “If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law” (Galatians 5:18 NKJ).  Paul certainly regarded himself as “led by the Spirit”. 

[Resurrection Priest]

1 hour ago, Billiards Ball said:

But Christians don't sin by going to church Sunday (or Monday... or Tuesday...)!

True.  It's not a "sin" to worship on any day.

They do "sin" when they fail to "remember" the Sabbath, to rest on HIS DAY.

Revelation 11:15 & 19  “The 7th angel sounded.” ... “The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our LORD and of His Christ ...”  “Then the temple of God was opened in heaven, and the ark of His covenant was seen in His temple.  And there were lightnings, noises, thunderings, an earthquake, and great hail.”

The Book of Revelation is written as an ancient covenant lawsuit.  The LORD is bringing charges against all those who have broken His Covenant and taught men to do so.  The 7th angel has sounded.  The time for judgment has come (v.18).  And the Ark is seen in “the Temple of God” - which is heaven itself (Heb. 8:2).   

The Ark of Heaven contains the Covenant - the standard in judgment. 

Why present this Covenant standard at the very end of this age - if it no longer applies?

[Blood Bought 1953]

48 minutes ago, Resurrection Priest said:

Hebrews 10:4-10  “For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.
        Therefore, when He [Jesus] came into the world, He said: ‘Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, But a body You have prepared for Me.   In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure.’
        Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come-- In the volume of the book it is written of Me-- To do Your will, O God.’
        Previously saying, ‘Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them’ (which are offered according to the law),
        then He said, ‘Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.’ He takes away the first that He may establish the second."

Hebrews 7: “For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law” (v.18). “For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, (v. 19) for the law made nothing perfect.  On the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.”

What "commandment" was annulled?  Which one was "weak and unprofitable"?

The "weak and unprofitable" commandment" was "the blood of bulls and goats" and the ministry of justification through a sinful human Levite priesthood.  Hebrews is NOT SAYING that the TEN COMMANDMENTS were "weak and unprofitable". 

The ONLY thing I see specifically "changed" was the sacrificial system. 

The perfect death of Yeshua, and His perfect ministry as our Priest has replaced the system of animal sacrifices through the Levite priests. 

 

The Law served its purpose in my life— it lead me to Jesus— I’m done with it.

The Law was given to “ shut the mouths” of all of those that mistakenly thought that they could keep it

The Law was our Moral “ rudder”........the unsaved can feel free to use it as a moral guide.Those Of us in The Body Of Christ have something much better than an external , artificial way to make us behave— we have something now that is INTERNAL, which makes it possible to forget about doing things in an artificial way ( doing things because we have been Commanded to ) and do things from our hearts— NEW HEARTS! With a New Heart, the saved individual can do what they want. The Holy Spirit changes our “ Wants” . Trust God and  the  Holy Spirit inside you and you will be surprised how much “ your” new wants will line up with “ HIS” wants.....As always with the things of God— it's all about TRUST.You either have it or you don’t.

 

[Tzephanyahu]

2 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

Please cite your source for this. And there are not 613 laws, as mentioned a few posts ago. 

Shalom Friend,

Have you studied the "613" laws for yourself?  Or are you just accepting what you have been told?  I have studied them individually and I can tell you that there are many repetitions, extensions and definitions on existing laws, laws for priests alone, laws for women alone, laws to only put in affect in certain circumstances and other "laws" are actually just statements. When all is said and done 613 IS a grossly inflated number.

Before you accept the burden, from the Jewish sages, of this "613" classification - study and investigate it for yourself.  You can download a list of the 613, import it into a spreadsheet and categorise them accordingly - an exercise I carried out a while ago. See for yourself.  Don't take my word or the word of Jewish sages.  Read each one for yourself and consider it for yourself.   And investigate very thoroughly as some summaries that are in this 613 can actually be quite distorted from what the verse it is linked to actually says.

Investigate this matter for yourself and see.  Don't take my word or anyone elses. We only have one life but plenty of time to study such things, instead of spending it on other hobbies, so I encourage you to do so soon.  And come on, this is a classification that comes from the same people who says that doesn't believe in the Yahushua the Messiah!

2 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

if you respect me as a Jew you will please stop telling me the 613 "don't exist"

My friend, I do respect you.  Otherwise I wouldn't bother with typing the above or typing to you at all!  All of this is ultimately out of love. 

But consider what faith you are putting on the classification of "613" if you haven't researched each one for yourself personally (yes, each and every one).  Aren't you just placing faith in the matter in the hands of men?  I know this to be true or you would see that it is 613 - even if you JUST take out the repetitions.

2 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

Trust me, as a Jew, a lot of the old Saturday shul magic disappears when you get saved.

This is what I meant about being concerned that your past is discolouring your view of the Sabbath.  It would have been better if you never had the traditional experience in some way as it comes with a lot of extra baggage.  No offence, but I'm very aware of a modern day Sabbath amongst Jews - Orthodox and casual.

2 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

It caused great uproar to share Jesus in synagogue and the Bible records the believers met on Saturday night

That's complicated equivalence.  You are seeing facts that aren't there.  Yes, sharing the Messiah in the synagogue would have caused an uproar.  But whose to say they didn't observe Sabbath by hearing Moses being read in the synagogue (Acts 15) or resting at home. You seem to be implying that observing the Sabbath for first century believers would require them going to the Synagogue a singing to Yahushua.  Or that if they went to the synagogue they would have to start preaching.  It would make sense that they would also meet after Sabbath to celebrate the Messiah in secret though.

2 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

do you not understand that a Gentile off the street could get saved but not sit down in synagogue to do the Sabbath with Jews?

Yes I understand that fully.  But why are you thinking that "Sabbath = synagogue attendance".  I think you are seeing the matter with traditionalist eyes.  Yes, it was common practice to go to Synagogue.  But would they be breaking Sabbath stay in the home together and not attending? No. Sabbath does not equal synagogue.

2 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

here are multiple clues in the scriptures that the house churches met starting on Saturday night, as above.

Again, meeting together on Saturday night is in no way saying "Therefore, the Christians violated the Sabbath".  On the contrary, it implies they met AFTER the Sabbath as they were observing it.  If you have a church meeting on Sunday night, should someone assume you didn't go in the morning?

In summary - you have provided no scriptural source to back up your claim.  Just hazy implications.  Sorry that sounds harsh, but it's the truth no?  If not, provide me evidence to back up your claim that first century Christians ignored the Sabbath.

2 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

I thought I was clear, I don't follow the 10, they are small, almost nothing. I don't say, "I'm a huge Christian because I neither murder nor commit adultery." Jesus needs me to work on much harder laws avoiding mere anger and lust!

I'm shocked you can say such a thing!  And, if you were at foot on Sinai when these great 10 were given, I would be surprised if you would have said "they are small, almost nothing".  From one disciple to another, repent of this statement.  Even if you think they do not apply to you, have some respect for words of Yahweh!  Don't call them "almost nothing", come on.  That is not the Spirit of God speaking within you.

Now, I understand what you are trying to say here: "I'm not trying to avoid adultery... I'm trying to avoid lust!"  Yes, yes, very good, I get your point.  But one can't be without the other.  You can't say "let me deal with lust issues, THEN I'll deal with adultery issues" - both are one and the same.  Therefore, to follow the 10 commandments correctly is to follow the heart intention - as we were taught by Messiah.  But to say "I don't follow the 10, but I try to follow the beatitudes" is a confused statement and, to be bold, seems to be a convenient way for you to side step the topic we're discussing of the Sabbath.

3 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

YES unless you avoid wearing clothes of two fabrics and kill pigeons when you sin also, because James says you have to do it all if you're going to break one or some!

I don't know how many times I have written this, but I'll write it again.  If you have an issue with the 10, then there is no point discussing the rest of the Torah with you as you have stumbled over the Covenant laws. Why do you consistently hide behind the "mixed fabrics" law as if it's a trump care to side step the Sabbath.  

Anyway, you wrote "yes" to Option A.  So you think these 10 commandments were for Israel back then.  Why then do you think that any of the promises to them apply to you at all.  Why do ANY promises from the Tanakh apply to you in that case?  What, you want to take the promises and leave the rest you don't like?  Your logic and theology, IF this is the case, is flawed.  IF this is what you think, you will continue to struggle to understand the Word, as you highlight a verse here and ignore 20 beneath it.

3 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

YES, which is a SCRIPTURAL argument, although there are more applications that "just" to point

Right, so you say yes to Option B too.  Yes indeed, the Torah does point us to the Messiah, not only the Sabbath but in greater ways elsewhere in Torah.  And not just the Torah, but every part of the Tanakh.  But if you think that the literal is replaced with the typological, then you haven't understood Scripture and I am surprised a Jew could read it as such! 

Foreshadows play a big role in the Bible, of course, but the literal interpretation is never falsified or by the Shadowcaster.  For example - David and Cyrus were types of Messiah - but when the Messiah came it didn't mean David and Cyrus never existed and were just fiction.  If you think Torah becomes redundant now that Messiah came, then why did the Messiah follow it at all and why are we exhorted in Revelation to continue to follow it?  

Yes, Torah points towards the Messiah and it points us to the way of holy living.  To ignore that and see it as basically an "ancient signpost to Messiah" only is illogical, without wisdom and unscriptural.  Although you say there are more "applications" than just a signpost, which gives me hope for this conversation.

3 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

I was nailed to the cross, not the Law, so that I would die to being married to the Law as a Jew, to be wed to JESUS, who ROSE FROM THE DEAD, to bear REAL fruit for God, as in Romans 7

Yes to option C as well then... Good, I'm glad you not one of those who say the Law was nailed to the cross.  Yes, I agree. You died to the Torah (as in its curses which appointed you to death) to be wed to Messiah.

Now what are you going to do with your new life?  Become more like Him?  Well then, how did He walk and what virtues did He uphold?  

Let me ask you this.  If the Messiah appeared to you now would you be so bold as to say to Him "It's lawful to break the Sabbath and the 10 commandments are small to me, almost nothing".  Or would you show a little more respect about His Word?  Imagine if someone approached Him with these same objections in the book of Matthew - what do you suppose He might have said?  "Well done, good and faithful servant - you are not far from the Kingdom of God"?

We are told repeatedly to go and sin no more.  But what is the definition of sin and the boundaries of it without the Torah?  So yes, you are free of the bonds of the curse of Torah for violating it. But free to follow it in newness of Spirit.  Not out of fear of punishment and death - as that has been removed from us.  Now we are free to follow it, if we choose, to benefit from it's wisdom and refine our walk.   If we fail it, no penalty is incurred.  But if we follow it, which the Spirit helps us to do, we show fruit of our obedience, dedication, holiness (separating ourselves) and most importantly our love for Him.

3 hours ago, Billiards Ball said:

Jesus said all the Law/Laws have to do with these things, yes. And no, God never commanded Gentiles to observe the Sabbath, so He doesn't care. I agree.

So you're agreeing with Option D as well.  What a tricky customer you are being  

Yes, the whole Torah relies on these two things.  

How do you love your neighbour?  Do you care for the poor and needy, show love to your brothers and sisters and remain charitable? You do a good thing.  Against such things there is no condemnation or law.

How do you love God though?  Singing a little worship song every day? Praying to Him?.... is that it?  What else? Because it certainly isn't listening to His Words.  No, you have taken the approach of calling them small and "almost nothing".  Yet, I suppose in the next breathe you would say you walk and are lead by the Spirit.  Really?  Does the Spirit lead you to debate with me about the importance of Torah?  How unscriptural. 

Again, I'm not saying Torah is needed for salvation - I've never said that on this forum, ever.  But I am saying that it should be respected and adhered to as a training manual of righteousness and holiness as we grow in our faith - instead of the alternatives of quaint daily reading plans and books by Kenneth Copeland and the like.

Forgive me for quoting Paul this once, but you did bring him up in your Romans 7 quotation, so...

Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.  But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

2 Timothy 3:10-14 (No New Testament written at the time, this was referring to the Tanakh).

Closing note:  Please don't get offended by this post.  I have written very strongly and sharply - mainly to make my point in brief.  I mean you no ill-will my friend.  If you go on your way without listening to a word I've said - Peace be with you and may Yahweh bless you.  Know I mean no ill-intent towards you but just writing boldly for brevity sake (even though this was hardly brief) and to establish my point of view.

Love & Shalom

[Billiards Ball]

21 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said:

I believe the Scriptures teach a "one step at a time" when it comes to the Torah, to those who are being grafted in or re-grafted in, as Acts 15 implies - "For Moses is read in the synagogues every Sabbath".  

Now, the Sabbath is a major command, making up part of the 10 commandments (and having the most details within the 10 in Exodus 20).    Therefore, why bother discussing the other commands when this major one is in debate?  As I said, the Torah seems to work on a hierarchy of importance.  So, if we ever get to the bottom of this one, then I'm more than happy to discuss others with you after.

This doesn't contradict my point.  On the Sabbath when the apostles were teaching and performing miracles, this was technically working - Like the Messiah did.  But what is the motive here?  Is it for selfish purposes or compromising with the world?  No, it was spreading the Gospel and demonstrating it with love for one another.  These things come first and before the Sabbath,as love and serving each other (which includes sharing the Gospel) is first and foremost. That is the point of Torah.

However, if you are not helping others or working to spread the good news on a typical Sabbath, then "business as usual" should be rest.

For example, I rest on the Sabbath but I get notifications from this Website when someone posts a question.  If I see someone in need who I believe I can help with advice, then I "work" to help build them up and encourage them - rather than wait until Saturday evening.  Which would be the same as turning my face away from someone in need (for the sake of keeping a commandment) thereby missing the whole point of Torah whilst doing so.

I'm concerned that your idea of Torah maybe coloured with oral law and tradition that springs from the Pharisees - which making Torah and Sabbath observance very heavy and surrounded with limits.  If I'm wrong, please forgive me.  It's just I have other Jewish friends who shrink away from the Torah as Christians because of the past traditional methods of following.  Does that even make sense? I hope so.

Then what about what Scripture says about all of those men in all those verses I cited?  

True. And we are saved to live righteously.  Trusting in Him also surely means that we listen to Him in all things.

That depends on your understanding of Genesis 26:5 (before Moses of course) and your acceptance of some Apocryphal books.  But, in order to stay strictly to the canon for the peace of your mind, I'm not going to go there.  

But I don't make Sabbath "magical".  Rather, I see it in the Hebraic way of a celebration of Yahweh's glorious creation, a  weekly gift of ordained rest, and THE symbol between Creator and His creation.

So how do you think the world will be judged and by what standard?  You could say the Noahide Covenant which was made with all nations, and that would be a fair theory.  But what about believers that aren't ignorant to the Torah and do know His ways and have chose to leave them because they don't have to follow them.  (Again, we don't have to follow them. But we are free to choose if we do.)

We read in Scripture that not all believers are seen as equal by God and that there is different rewards and states for us in the next life.  Isn't it reasonable to think that those who choose to follow with their freedom will be seen as worthy of great reward? 

To paraphrase Matthew 5 "Those who follow and teach the Torah will be called great in the kingdom of God and those who ignore and discourage others also will be called least in the kingdom of God".  BOTH groups are saved - but there is a division in their resurrection rewards.  This teaching runs throughout the Messiah's messages and parables.

Hehe, yeah sorry.  Some of my rhetorical questions are awful *facepalm

How are you defining holiness exactly, if not by the Word?  Following the Messiah's example?  Then to what standard did He live by? (another rhetorical.. *facepalm)

By what definition? the Messiah's?  Was this not based upon Torah?  He taught us how to interpret it, so we should press on.  Not in oldness of letter but newness of Spirit. Or do you go the standards of Modern Christianity? That is, the masses.

Well, I would disagree and say to die to the penalty of not following it.  That is, we are now dead to it. No longer to incur the wrath and curse that comes from disobedience (Praise Yahweh!).  Now, what are you going to do with your freedom?  How are you going to live for Him and show Him you love Him?

Let me put it this way, how do you love Him?  Most people will answer in ways that is actually about loving your neighbour, which is partially loving Him.  But how do you love HIM, specifically and personally?  With a prayer of thanks twice a day?  Singing a Hillsong worship song?  Is this the love He desires when we also ignore the guidance He gave us on holy and clean living, and ignoring His Sabbath?

Put it this way.  Let's imagine I say to my wife "I love you so much, more than life itself! Praise you!" but one day she responds "Can we spend one day together, away from everything, each week? It will be our special day ".  But let's imagine I reply "No.  That shouldn't be needed to prove I love you!  Anyway, I love you so much, more than life itself! Praise you!".  How do you think she would feel about it?  How can we expect the Father to feel much different?

Now, you say your primary guidance is the Bible and forgive me for being provocative here but can I question that?  Because surely you are mainly referring to the New Testament only?  What about all that Yahweh said in the Tanakh?  Do you really believe that Paul was overturning these words? Or has he been misunderstood?

Forgive me if that's too provocative.  I mean you no ill-will at all.  Just enjoying the debate.

Hmm, I don't witness this.  As I've said, as Paul letters are difficult to understand (as Peter says), so please provide your Scriptures for this.  I certainly expect to see something in the words of the Messiah, if you affirm this, so please provide these verses (outside of the letters of Paul).

Disclaimer: I love Paul and see his letters as Holy Scripture.  But many misunderstand him easily (2 Peter 3:14-18) so I'm suggesting for debate purposes to discuss outside his letters.

Lord Yahushua/Jesus was a Sabbath in TYPE.  Surely as a Jew you understand this.   He is a Sabbath in TYPE only, not actually a literal Sabbath.  Otherwise what are we saying - is he a LITERAL lamb, LITERAL lion, and LITERAL rock?  A LITERAL gate? Come on, surely you must understand this method of Hebraic teaching and relational-teaching.  Let's approach the Scripture reasonably and in context - not seeking ways to back our theology.

But yes, amen, we are saved and sanctified by grace and not works. And in the same way, faith without works is dead.  We're not saved BY service, but saved FOR service - just like Israel was from Egypt.

You've raised some great points though.

Love & Shalom

 

The world will be judged by who has trusted Christ and who hasn't. The Law was given to the Jewish people. I don't understand why many Christians feel they must try to keep some but not all of the Law.

[Billiards Ball]

16 hours ago, Resurrection Priest said:

Hebrews 10:4-10  “For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.
        Therefore, when He [Jesus] came into the world, He said: ‘Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, But a body You have prepared for Me.   In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You had no pleasure.’
        Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come-- In the volume of the book it is written of Me-- To do Your will, O God.’
        Previously saying, ‘Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them’ (which are offered according to the law),
        then He said, ‘Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.’ He takes away the first that He may establish the second."

Hebrews 7: “For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law” (v.18). “For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, (v. 19) for the law made nothing perfect.  On the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God.”

What "commandment" was annulled?  Which one was "weak and unprofitable"?

The "weak and unprofitable" commandment" was "the blood of bulls and goats" and the ministry of justification through a sinful human Levite priesthood.  Hebrews is NOT SAYING that the TEN COMMANDMENTS were "weak and unprofitable". 

The ONLY thing I see specifically "changed" was the sacrificial system. 

The perfect death of Yeshua, and His perfect ministry as our Priest has replaced the system of animal sacrifices through the Levite priests. 

Is Hebrews 10 the sole statement of what Christ did regarding our relationship to the Law? Of course not.

I was wed to the Law as a Jew and if I cling to Christ without dying to the Law, I'm an adulterer (Romans 7).

By the way, He took away the first (covenant with the Law) to establish the second (covenant with Christ). That's your Hebrews 10 statement that all the Law is weaker than the Christ for it (THE LAW) made NOTHING PERFECT. Why would I perfectly keep a Sabbath to make NOTHING perfect? That makes no sense!

In love, BB.

[Billiards Ball]

15 hours ago, Resurrection Priest said:

At that time - Moses was read every Sabbath, in the synagogues.  At that time - the first disciples were Jews.  Paul sought out the Jewish synagogues first - in every city where he traveled.  He taught there first.  Sometimes they kicked him out.  Sometimes not.  Once they kicked him out, did he tell all the Gentile believers to meet him on Sundays?  No.

In Antioch Paul worshiped in the synagogue, on the Sabbath (Acts 13:14-16). When the Jews had left the synagogue, the Gentiles begged Paul to preach to them “the next Sabbath” (13:44).  He didn't tell them to meet him on Sunday.  And almost the whole city came to hear him.

In Philippi, where there was no synagogue, Paul went out by the river “where prayer was customarily made.” He went there to worship on the Sabbath (Acts 16:13).  

In Thessalonica “Paul, as his custom was, went in (to the synagogue) to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the scriptures” (Acts 17:2).   

At Corinth he “reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath” (Acts 18:4,11).

But we find no passage where Paul expressly states that He now rested on Sunday, and we find no passage where Paul states that working on the Sabbath is now acceptable or lawful.

 

 

I didn't say Paul rested on Sunday, I said the NT is clear that money was collected in early church meetings, and that the church meeting on a Saturday could get a Jew killed.

NT Jews did NOT handle money on Sabbath, but they did EARLY ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK when the churches met. EARLY ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK is Saturday NIGHT. They didn't need to meet SUNDAY MORNING.

In love, let's discuss anything you want as long you draw off what I actually write!

[Billiards Ball]

15 hours ago, Resurrection Priest said:

True.  It's not a "sin" to worship on any day.

They do "sin" when they fail to "remember" the Sabbath, to rest on HIS DAY.

Revelation 11:15 & 19  “The 7th angel sounded.” ... “The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our LORD and of His Christ ...”  “Then the temple of God was opened in heaven, and the ark of His covenant was seen in His temple.  And there were lightnings, noises, thunderings, an earthquake, and great hail.”

The Book of Revelation is written as an ancient covenant lawsuit.  The LORD is bringing charges against all those who have broken His Covenant and taught men to do so.  The 7th angel has sounded.  The time for judgment has come (v.18).  And the Ark is seen in “the Temple of God” - which is heaven itself (Heb. 8:2).   

The Ark of Heaven contains the Covenant - the standard in judgment. 

Why present this Covenant standard at the very end of this age - if it no longer applies?

Do you have a NT or OT command where GENTILES need to rest on HIS DAY? If you did, I don't think you'd have mentioned the ark of Revelation.

[Billiards Ball]

14 hours ago, Tzephanyahu said:

Shalom Friend,

Have you studied the "613" laws for yourself?  Or are you just accepting what you have been told?  I have studied them individually and I can tell you that there are many repetitions, extensions and definitions on existing laws, laws for priests alone, laws for women alone, laws to only put in affect in certain circumstances and other "laws" are actually just statements. When all is said and done 613 IS a grossly inflated number.

Before you accept the burden, from the Jewish sages, of this "613" classification - study and investigate it for yourself.  You can download a list of the 613, import it into a spreadsheet and categorise them accordingly - an exercise I carried out a while ago. See for yourself.  Don't take my word or the word of Jewish sages.  Read each one for yourself and consider it for yourself.   And investigate very thoroughly as some summaries that are in this 613 can actually be quite distorted from what the verse it is linked to actually says.

Investigate this matter for yourself and see.  Don't take my word or anyone elses. We only have one life but plenty of time to study such things, instead of spending it on other hobbies, so I encourage you to do so soon.  And come on, this is a classification that comes from the same people who says that doesn't believe in the Yahushua the Messiah!

My friend, I do respect you.  Otherwise I wouldn't bother with typing the above or typing to you at all!  All of this is ultimately out of love. 

But consider what faith you are putting on the classification of "613" if you haven't researched each one for yourself personally (yes, each and every one).  Aren't you just placing faith in the matter in the hands of men?  I know this to be true or you would see that it is 613 - even if you JUST take out the repetitions.

This is what I meant about being concerned that your past is discolouring your view of the Sabbath.  It would have been better if you never had the traditional experience in some way as it comes with a lot of extra baggage.  No offence, but I'm very aware of a modern day Sabbath amongst Jews - Orthodox and casual.

That's complicated equivalence.  You are seeing facts that aren't there.  Yes, sharing the Messiah in the synagogue would have caused an uproar.  But whose to say they didn't observe Sabbath by hearing Moses being read in the synagogue (Acts 15) or resting at home. You seem to be implying that observing the Sabbath for first century believers would require them going to the Synagogue a singing to Yahushua.  Or that if they went to the synagogue they would have to start preaching.  It would make sense that they would also meet after Sabbath to celebrate the Messiah in secret though.

Yes I understand that fully.  But why are you thinking that "Sabbath = synagogue attendance".  I think you are seeing the matter with traditionalist eyes.  Yes, it was common practice to go to Synagogue.  But would they be breaking Sabbath stay in the home together and not attending? No. Sabbath does not equal synagogue.

Again, meeting together on Saturday night is in no way saying "Therefore, the Christians violated the Sabbath".  On the contrary, it implies they met AFTER the Sabbath as they were observing it.  If you have a church meeting on Sunday night, should someone assume you didn't go in the morning?

In summary - you have provided no scriptural source to back up your claim.  Just hazy implications.  Sorry that sounds harsh, but it's the truth no?  If not, provide me evidence to back up your claim that first century Christians ignored the Sabbath.

I'm shocked you can say such a thing!  And, if you were at foot on Sinai when these great 10 were given, I would be surprised if you would have said "they are small, almost nothing".  From one disciple to another, repent of this statement.  Even if you think they do not apply to you, have some respect for words of Yahweh!  Don't call them "almost nothing", come on.  That is not the Spirit of God speaking within you.

Now, I understand what you are trying to say here: "I'm not trying to avoid adultery... I'm trying to avoid lust!"  Yes, yes, very good, I get your point.  But one can't be without the other.  You can't say "let me deal with lust issues, THEN I'll deal with adultery issues" - both are one and the same.  Therefore, to follow the 10 commandments correctly is to follow the heart intention - as we were taught by Messiah.  But to say "I don't follow the 10, but I try to follow the beatitudes" is a confused statement and, to be bold, seems to be a convenient way for you to side step the topic we're discussing of the Sabbath.

I don't know how many times I have written this, but I'll write it again.  If you have an issue with the 10, then there is no point discussing the rest of the Torah with you as you have stumbled over the Covenant laws. Why do you consistently hide behind the "mixed fabrics" law as if it's a trump care to side step the Sabbath.  

Anyway, you wrote "yes" to Option A.  So you think these 10 commandments were for Israel back then.  Why then do you think that any of the promises to them apply to you at all.  Why do ANY promises from the Tanakh apply to you in that case?  What, you want to take the promises and leave the rest you don't like?  Your logic and theology, IF this is the case, is flawed.  IF this is what you think, you will continue to struggle to understand the Word, as you highlight a verse here and ignore 20 beneath it.

Right, so you say yes to Option B too.  Yes indeed, the Torah does point us to the Messiah, not only the Sabbath but in greater ways elsewhere in Torah.  And not just the Torah, but every part of the Tanakh.  But if you think that the literal is replaced with the typological, then you haven't understood Scripture and I am surprised a Jew could read it as such! 

Foreshadows play a big role in the Bible, of course, but the literal interpretation is never falsified or by the Shadowcaster.  For example - David and Cyrus were types of Messiah - but when the Messiah came it didn't mean David and Cyrus never existed and were just fiction.  If you think Torah becomes redundant now that Messiah came, then why did the Messiah follow it at all and why are we exhorted in Revelation to continue to follow it?  

Yes, Torah points towards the Messiah and it points us to the way of holy living.  To ignore that and see it as basically an "ancient signpost to Messiah" only is illogical, without wisdom and unscriptural.  Although you say there are more "applications" than just a signpost, which gives me hope for this conversation.

Yes to option C as well then... Good, I'm glad you not one of those who say the Law was nailed to the cross.  Yes, I agree. You died to the Torah (as in its curses which appointed you to death) to be wed to Messiah.

Now what are you going to do with your new life?  Become more like Him?  Well then, how did He walk and what virtues did He uphold?  

Let me ask you this.  If the Messiah appeared to you now would you be so bold as to say to Him "It's lawful to break the Sabbath and the 10 commandments are small to me, almost nothing".  Or would you show a little more respect about His Word?  Imagine if someone approached Him with these same objections in the book of Matthew - what do you suppose He might have said?  "Well done, good and faithful servant - you are not far from the Kingdom of God"?

We are told repeatedly to go and sin no more.  But what is the definition of sin and the boundaries of it without the Torah?  So yes, you are free of the bonds of the curse of Torah for violating it. But free to follow it in newness of Spirit.  Not out of fear of punishment and death - as that has been removed from us.  Now we are free to follow it, if we choose, to benefit from it's wisdom and refine our walk.   If we fail it, no penalty is incurred.  But if we follow it, which the Spirit helps us to do, we show fruit of our obedience, dedication, holiness (separating ourselves) and most importantly our love for Him.

So you're agreeing with Option D as well.  What a tricky customer you are being  

Yes, the whole Torah relies on these two things.  

How do you love your neighbour?  Do you care for the poor and needy, show love to your brothers and sisters and remain charitable? You do a good thing.  Against such things there is no condemnation or law.

How do you love God though?  Singing a little worship song every day? Praying to Him?.... is that it?  What else? Because it certainly isn't listening to His Words.  No, you have taken the approach of calling them small and "almost nothing".  Yet, I suppose in the next breathe you would say you walk and are lead by the Spirit.  Really?  Does the Spirit lead you to debate with me about the importance of Torah?  How unscriptural. 

Again, I'm not saying Torah is needed for salvation - I've never said that on this forum, ever.  But I am saying that it should be respected and adhered to as a training manual of righteousness and holiness as we grow in our faith - instead of the alternatives of quaint daily reading plans and books by Kenneth Copeland and the like.

Forgive me for quoting Paul this once, but you did bring him up in your Romans 7 quotation, so...

Yes, and all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. But evil men and impostors will grow worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.  But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

2 Timothy 3:10-14 (No New Testament written at the time, this was referring to the Tanakh).

Closing note:  Please don't get offended by this post.  I have written very strongly and sharply - mainly to make my point in brief.  I mean you no ill-will my friend.  If you go on your way without listening to a word I've said - Peace be with you and may Yahweh bless you.  Know I mean no ill-intent towards you but just writing boldly for brevity sake (even though this was hardly brief) and to establish my point of view.

Love & Shalom

Only in part did you respond to what I said, and that's okay, but you made my point for me.

Good Jewish Christians in the Ancient Near East went to synagogue--or they were expelled from Jewish life. They sometimes shared Jesus, but if they did, there could be trouble. The NT is clear that the Jewish Christians, when they wanted meetings led by themselves or Christian leaders (without, say, a nonChristian Rabbi shouting them down) met on Saturday night after the Sabbath ended. The Gentile proselytes heard Moses Saturdays and didn't change their whole lives when they trusted Christ.

It was Saturday night because money was handled, wine was drunk, and it was just as the NT says EARLY ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK, which isn't Sunday morning but Saturday night, when the Sabbath ends and the new day begins. Jesus was "eight" due to gematria and other things and after the seventh day--AFTER Sabbath comes the eighth day, considered by the ancients even better than the seventh, perhaps, where there would be circumcision blood (the blood of the covenant the nonChristian Jew disregarded in Hebrews, not the blood of Christ, pointing to Christ) and where God was beginning His works again, etc.

 

If we reduce the 613 to 100 for redundancies, will that work for you? You've made some extraordinary comments here like "my past means I don't understand the Law properly" and it's my Law, not yours.  But if there are only 100 laws, why do you fervently keep some (non-Jewish style Bible kosher, Sabbath, murder) but not others (Levirate marriage, pigeon sacrifice, non-mixed garments, post the commands on your house door, etc.)?

 

Yes, if Jesus confronted me, I would say the 10 are nothing compared to HIM just as I'd say I hate my parents compared to Him. No idols! Great. ONE GOD! Greater! Don't murder! Don't adulter! My wife came home last night and said she's been romantically involved with a man for 10 years, kissing and hugging, fondling, but no intercourse, than wondered why I didn't praise her for honoring the big 10, after all, she never committed adultery...

Edited January 10, 2020 by Billiards Ball

[Tzephanyahu]

7 minutes ago, Billiards Ball said:

The world will be judged by who has trusted Christ and who hasn't. The Law was given to the Jewish people. I don't understand why many Christians feel they must try to keep some but not all of the Law.

Fair enough. I tried my best to explain and I don't think I can say much else on the matter. But if you can't see it, then you can't see it.  

So it's probably best to leave it there for now, but thank you for your patience in reading my extensive posts!  

May Yahweh bless you and yours.

Love & Shalom