Between You And The Woman

[sojourner]

That's exactly what Paul meant: Replacement Theology. The term "progression" is a cop-out.

Obviously, the sublety of the theology flies right over your head, since "progression" is precisely what is meant.:beach:

 

[Zardoz]

Obviously, the sublety of the theology flies right over your head, since "progression" is precisely what is meant.

Progression sure sounds like leaving one position to move to another, to me.

By comparison, Jews do not think that the covenant of Sinai replaced the covenant with Noah, but built upon it. Hence I consider myself fully a Noachide and a Jew at the same time.

From my experience, this is not the mindset of christianity. Toss aside the 'law' as a 'curse' that one should be happy to be 'free' from, is this mindset. Sadly altogether in opposition to the mindset of Yeshua in the Sermon of the Mount.

Discarding the 'old' for the 'new' is replacement. Even the terms OT and NT scream this out loudly.

 

[sojourner]

Progression sure sounds like leaving one position to move to another, to me.

By comparison, Jews do not think that the covenant of Sinai replaced the covenant with Noah, but built upon it. Hence I consider myself fully a Noachide and a Jew at the same time.

From my experience, this is not the mindset of christianity. Toss aside the 'law' as a 'curse' that one should be happy to be 'free' from, is this mindset. Sadly altogether in opposition to the mindset of Yeshua in the Sermon of the Mount.

Discarding the 'old' for the 'new' is replacement. Even the terms OT and NT scream this out loudly.

Nor do we think that the New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant, but built upon it. We progressed from being under the Law to being under grace. God has always provided for God's people methods for being reconciled to God. Paul wasn't talking about a "new Israel" (replacement), he was talking about the "true Israel" (progress from Law to grace). There's a subtle difference.

To 1st-century Xians, that progression was very much more black-and-white than it is to modern Xians. We don't agree with Paul that y'all have "rejected" what God has provided. Our mind set is that you all simply have taken another path to the same God.

 

[Zardoz]

Nor do we think that the New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant, but built upon it. We progressed from being under the Law to being under grace. God has always provided for God's people methods for being reconciled to God. Paul wasn't talking about a "new Israel" (replacement), he was talking about the "true Israel" (progress from Law to grace). There's a subtle difference.

To 1st-century Xians, that progression was very much more black-and-white than it is to modern Xians. We don't agree with Paul that y'all have "rejected" what God has provided. Our mind set is that you all simply have taken another path to the same God.

Yes, I do think there is many paths to G-d, and Judaism also has quite a bit of Grace in it's path, if you've ever seen/heard the High Holiday liturgy and the confession of sins, you know we rely heavily on grace and forgiveness.

I only worry that the Christian faith, with it's focus on Grace, could lose sight that it's still important to worship with Law. Not Jewish Law, as the target audience that Paul reaches out to isn't Jewish and therefore not obligated to follow. No, it's the Noachide Law that Christians, as a whole, should support and promote. Not to replace Grace, but to be obedient to G-d. It's all right there, even the prohibition against eating blood (which many Christians view as a dietary law, when in fact it's NOT) right in Acts 15:29 but this gets less attention in the church than it should.

 

[Ben Masada]

Obviously, the sublety of the theology flies right over your head, since "progression" is precisely what is meant.:beach:

Perhaps in the dictionary of your language. Not in English. :shout

 

[Ben Masada]

Progression sure sounds like leaving one position to move to another, to me.

By comparison, Jews do not think that the covenant of Sinai replaced the covenant with Noah, but built upon it. Hence I consider myself fully a Noachide and a Jew at the same time.

From my experience, this is not the mindset of christianity. Toss aside the 'law' as a 'curse' that one should be happy to be 'free' from, is this mindset. Sadly altogether in opposition to the mindset of Yeshua in the Sermon of the Mount.

Discarding the 'old' for the 'new' is replacement. Even the terms OT and NT scream this out loudly.

Thanks Zardoz, I couldn't have done any better. :clap

 

[sojourner]

Yes, I do think there is many paths to G-d, and Judaism also has quite a bit of Grace in it's path, if you've ever seen/heard the High Holiday liturgy and the confession of sins, you know we rely heavily on grace and forgiveness.

I only worry that the Christian faith, with it's focus on Grace, could lose sight that it's still important to worship with Law. Not Jewish Law, as the target audience that Paul reaches out to isn't Jewish and therefore not obligated to follow. No, it's the Noachide Law that Christians, as a whole, should support and promote. Not to replace Grace, but to be obedient to G-d. It's all right there, even the prohibition against eating blood (which many Christians view as a dietary law, when in fact it's NOT) right in Acts 15:29 but this gets less attention in the church than it should.

Not been to a High Holy liturgy, but yes, there is a lot of grace and forgiveness included.

As Christians, we don't discard the Law. That's throwing the baby out with the bath water. We simply reprioritize ourselves with regard to the Law.

It's kind of like this:
The Law says that all drivers have to stay on their side of the road. In pre-Jesus Judaism, the priority was upon the staying of the right side of the road. "If we stay on the right side, it proves that we're good drivers. If we don't stay there, we are bad drivers, and we will be punished."

Post-Jesus says, "We understand that we are good drivers. As such, we want to obey the rules of the road as best we are able. (If, however, we happen to stray across the yellow line, it doesn't prove that we're bad drivers, only that we need to refocus our attention. Sometimes, we understand that, for the sake of safety, we may have to swerve into the other lane. That doesn't make us bad drivers.)
Therefore, we don't obsess on staying in the proper lane. We just concentrate on 'being good drivers.'"

 

[sojourner]

Perhaps in the dictionary of your language. Not in English. :shout

Weak.

 

[jtartar]

Between You And The Woman

That's about Genesis 3:15, which Christians enjoy to erroneously attribute it to Mary and her offspring Jesus.

According to the allegory of Creation, God is addressing the Serpent, symbolized by the Adversary, which is the meaning of Satan, the enemy, as God speaks about the enmity between "You and the Woman."

According to Amos 5:2, the Woman here is the Virgin Israel, whose offspring is Judah, as we understand by reading Isaiah 7:14, 15, 22 and Isaiah 8:8.

In the statement "The Offspring will strike at your head," I can see from Jeremiah 46:28, that eventually God will make an end of all the nations. And in, "While you will strike at his heel," we have in the same quotation, that of Israel, God will only chastise as we deserve.

Part of the adversity between "You and the Woman" is well represented by the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology in Galatians 4:21-31, when he inverts the roles of "Your offspring" with the offspring of the bondwoman Hagar and set the Gentiles as offspring of Sarah. But this is only a strike at the heel.

According to the Essene Theology about the struggle between the sons of darkness and the sons of light, the "Sun" will rise again in the Morning and the adversary will be struck at his head, as the night vanishes at the the presence of a new day.

Ben

Ben Masada,
Pay close attention to what is actually said at Gen 3:14,15. Here God is talking to Satan, telling what will happen to him and all the ones who follow him. These constitute his seed. God then prophesies about a WOMAN and her seed. This woman is not Eve, or any woman on earth. This woman is God's woman, a wifelike organization, made up of God's chosen angels, who would finally produce the SEED of the woman. Jesus turned out to be the PRIMARY SEED mentioned here, Gal 3:16. The others of this seed would be the close followers of Jesus, Gal 3:26-29, 4:25,26.
Rev 12:1-6, tells about God's WOMAN who produced the King of God's Kingdom, Jesus.
Jesus would, in time, crush the head of Satan, but before that time Satan would figuratively crush Jesus' heel. Satan crushed Jesus' heel when He instigated the death of Jesus in 33CE. God resurrected Jesus parts of three days later. Jesus will, in the near future chain Satan and throw him into the abyss, later to destroy Satan by throwing him into the Lake of Fire, The Second Death, Rev 20:1-3,7-10,15.

 

[Zardoz]

Ben Masada,
Pay close attention to what is actually said at Gen 3:14,15. Here God is talking to Satan, telling what will happen to him and all the ones who follow him...

Bzzzt! Wrong! Why not wind back to 3:1 and see that this is the serpent and not satan?
Re-casting the role for satan is a Xian invention, like all the myths about satan, all nonsense.

 

[Ben Masada]

Bzzzt! Wrong! Why not wind back to 3:1 and see that this is the serpent and not satan?
Re-casting the role for satan is a Xian invention, like all the myths about satan, all nonsense.

Tell him (or her?) Zardoz! I think djartar must be of those who enjoy sharing of his part with the believers of serpents and Satans.