Can Jewish law be fulfilled?

[Harmonious]

Jews sin over and over and Christians as well sin over and over.
I suppose we could say it's "human nature."
If a Jew sins, the priest sacrifices again and the Jew is forgiven and the slate is clean.

No, if a Jew sins, we repent, and the Jews is forgiven, and the slate is clean. The sacrifice is not the be all and end all of "cleaning the slate" of our sins.

But Christians have a problem.
If a Chrisian sins, can Jesus get back on the cross again? No he can't!
This following Scripture from Hebrews decribes the Christian problem.
Hebrews 6:4-6
4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,
5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.

This is one of those Scriptures that they never read in church.
If they read this in church, and people realized that they continually sin, they would know that they are lost. Their sins were forgiven one time. Now they are on their own. ""it is impossible to renew them again to repentance""

BigRed

Oh, dear. That is an interesting revelation.

 

[smokydot]

It is important to notice that the Fruit didn't kill Adam and Eve.
It is important to notice that contrary to Christian dogma the Serpent didn't lie.
BigRed

The hebrew reads: "Dying, you will die." The death process started right then, and ended the way it was promised. . .the serpent did lie.

And his minions still operate with the same lie: "Hath God said" in the Scriptures? It is not so.

 

[Harmonious]

The hebrew reads: "Dying, you will die." The death process started right then, and ended the way it was promised. . .the serpent did lie.

Who is to say that death was a process, and it wasn't instantaneous?

You know... Jews have the tradition of understanding that, until Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, people didn't show signs of old age. They just lived however long God gave them, and then they died.

But between Abraham and Isaac (I don't remember what the tradition says about which one it was) asked for a sign so that they would know that death was approaching. (It didn't necessarily mean that death was coming for several more decades, but they knew it was up and coming.)

So... I'm not convinced that the serpent DID lie. Death wasn't instantaneous, and it took over 930 years for any signs of mortality to start showing up.

And his minions still operate with the same lie: "Hath God said" in the Scriptures? It is not so.

The snake didn't have minions. It was a snake.

I realize that you believe that the snake was an avatar for the embodiment of evil, but that is your belief. According to mine, it was nothing more than a walking, talking snake. And one of its punishments was God's taking away its power of speech.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The hebrew reads: "Dying, you will die." The death process started right then, and ended the way it was promised. . .the serpent did lie.

And his minions still operate with the same lie: "Hath God said" in the Scriptures? It is not so.

 

[smokydot]

Jews sin over and over and Christians as well sin over and over.
I suppose we could say it's "human nature."
If a Jew sins, the priest sacrifices again and the Jew is forgiven and the slate is clean.
But Christians have a problem.
If a Chrisian sins, can Jesus get back on the cross again? No he can't!
This following Scripture from Hebrews decribes the Christian problem.
Hebrews 6:4-6
4For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit,
5and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
6and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.

This is one of those Scriptures that they never read in church.
If they read this in church, and people realized that they continually sin, they would know that they are lost. Their sins were forgiven one time. Now they are on their own. ""it is impossible to renew them again to repentance""

BigRed

And it's from the letter to the Hebrews, which, as is seen here, ---> http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2318469-post513.html contains four warnings,
to the professing Jewish Christians who were being tempted to revert to Judaism or to Judaize the gospel (Gal 2:14), warnings not to fall away or lapse from Christianity.
This is the second of those warnings.

1) It is the principle: there is no forgiveness for sin against the remedy.
If the sacrifice of Christ is rejected, which is the only remedy for sin (and which is what these Jewish Christians were in danger of doing by reverting to Judaism),
then there remains no other sacrifice to save them from the wrath of God on their sin (Heb 10:26).

2) It is the prinicple of Jn 3:36b: "whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."

3) It is the principle of Nu 15:22-31 in the OT: there was no forgiveness for intentional (willful, defiant, high-handed, presumptuous) sin, the Israelite must be
cut off (vv 30-31); that is, separated from the community by death (a prefigure of Ro 6:23), because there was no sacrifice for intentional sin. . .all Israel's sacrifices
were for unintentional sin (Lev 4:1, 13, 22, 27).

It is "impossible to renew anyone to repentance" who rejects the only remedy for their sin, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. . .because they are sinning against the remedy.

So it's not about daily sin in the life of a believer. . .it's about the sinning against the remedy of the unbeliever.

 

[BigRed]

No, if a Jew sins, we repent, and the Jews is forgiven, and the slate is clean. The sacrifice is not the be all and end all of "cleaning the slate" of our sins.

Since there is no longer a Temple this is what I meant.....
Hosea 14:2
Take with you words, and turn to the LORD: say unto him, Take away all iniquity, and receive us graciously: so will we render the calves of our lips.

3. Take words with yourselves and return to the Lord. Say, "You shall forgive all iniquity and teach us [the] good [way], and let us render [for] bulls [the offering of] our lips.

BigRed

 

[smokydot]

Who is to say that death was a process, and it wasn't instantaneous?

The language says it is a process. . .dying. . .you will die. . .the first, a process. . .the second, the end of the process.

You know... Jews have the tradition of understanding that, until Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, people didn't show signs of old age. They just lived however long God gave them, and then they died.

I think that might better apply to pre-flood.

But between Abraham and Isaac (I don't remember what the tradition says about which one it was) asked for a sign so that they would know that death was approaching. (It didn't necessarily mean that death was coming for several more decades, but they knew it was up and coming.)
So... I'm not convinced that the serpent DID lie. Death wasn't instantaneous,

The language didn't say that it would be instantaneous. . .the language speaks of a process--dying. . .your days start decreasing the day you are born.

and it took over 930 years for any signs of mortality to start showdyining up.
The snake didn't have minions. It was a snake.
I realize that you believe that the snake was an avatar for the embodiment of evil, but that is your belief. According to mine, it was nothing more than a walking, talking snake. And one of its punishments was God's taking away its power of speech.

Where is that in the Genesis account?

 

[smokydot]

e Q.E.D.

 

[BigRed]

The hebrew reads: "Dying, you will die." The death process started right then, and ended the way it was promised. . .the serpent did lie.

And his minions still operate with the same lie: "Hath God said" in the Scriptures? It is not so.

When you quote Scripture why not provide the chapter and verse to avoid any ambiguity?

What lie or lies did the Serpent tell? [Please provide chapter and verse]

BigRed

 

[angellous_evangellous]

e Q.E.D.

You throw around legal terms just as irresponsibly as you do everything else.

People [like you] who can't read Greek and Hebrew can ASK those of us what it means and not speak about it with authority themselves.

Just because you can locate a word in a concordance [or whatever you plagiarized your translation from], that does not mean that you know what it means. You can vainly and arrogantly pretend like you know, but you will not ever fail to be wrong.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The language says it is a process. . .dying. . .you will die. . .the first, a process. . .the second, the end of the process.

Sweet Jesus deliver us! :banghead3:computer:

 

[BigRed]

And it's from the letter to the Hebrews, which, as is seen here, ---> http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2318469-post513.html contains four warnings,
to the professing Jewish Christians who were being tempted to revert to Judaism or to Judaize the gospel (Gal 2:14), warnings not to fall away or lapse from Christianity.
This is the second of those warnings.

It is the principle that there is no forgiveness for sin against the remedy. If the sacrifice of Christ is rejected, which is the only remedy for sin (and which is what these Jewish Christians were in danger of doing by reverting to Judaism), then there remains no other sacrifice to save them from the wrath of God on their sin (Heb 10:26).

It is the prinicple of Jn 3:36b: "whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."

It is impossible to renew anyone to repentance who rejects the only remedy for their sin, the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. . .because they are sinning against the remedy.

It's not about daily sin in the life of a believer. . .it's about the sinning against the remedy of the unbeliever.

Same old Christian Apologists formula. If a verse interferes with Christian theology....just reinterpret...give it a new meaning.

BigRed
Hebrews 10:26.....For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.

 

[Harmonious]

Actually, that one wasn't too far off.

The Hebrew of Genesis 2:17 actually reads:

יז. וּמֵעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע לֹא תֹאכַל מִמֶּנּוּ כִּי בְּיוֹם אֲכָלְךָ מִמֶּנּוּ מוֹת תָּמוּת:

Umei'eitz hada'at tov vara' lo tochal mimenu ki b'yom acha'cha mimenu mot tamut.

Simply translated (by Harmonious): And from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil you will not eat from it, because on the day you eat from it you will surely die.

But the portion that is highlighted in the Hebrew could, in fact, be translated (not syntactically well in English, but none the less) "die you will die".

Now, my highlighted words reflect smoky's highlighted words.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

The language says it is a process. . .dying. . .you will die. . .the first, a process. . .the second, the end of the process.

When you rape the text in this way, you divorce the translation from the original idiomatic expression.

NETBible: Genesis 2:17

See the last note and compare translations.

*Oh and the idiom is common and appears all throughout the Hebrew bible*

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Actually, that one wasn't too far off.

The Hebrew of Genesis 2:17 actually reads:

יז. וּמֵעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע לֹא תֹאכַל מִמֶּנּוּ כִּי בְּיוֹם אֲכָלְךָ מִמֶּנּוּ מוֹת תָּמוּת:

Umei'eitz hada'at tov vara' lo tochal mimenu ki b'yom acha'cha mimenu mot tamut.

Simply translated (by Harmonious): And from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil you will not eat from it, because on the day you eat from it you will surely die.

But the portion that is highlighted in the Hebrew could, in fact, be translated (not syntactically well in English, but none the less) "die you will die".

Now, my highlighted words reflect smoky's highlighted words.

My complaint was that he had no clue what he was doing, other than ripping off some dictionary. His later posts clarify that point.

 

[Harmonious]

The language says it is a process. . .dying. . .you will die. . .the first, a process. . .the second, the end of the process.

Actually, you are wrong.

The doubled language of the word dying, Mot tamut, doesn't work the way you suggest. The repetition is only for emphasis, not to give a secondary dying.

A homiletic case could be made that the repetition could actually mean that, but that is not the simple function of the words. (It DOES help to actually know the Hebrew.)

I think that might better apply to pre-flood.

Not really. Abraham lived to be 175. He and his wife were the first people we know were discussed as "getting old," as Sarah laughed at the idea of having children when she was clearly post-menopausal. But she was probably one of the first generation to EXPERIENCE menopause.

After all, we don't know how old Abraham or Sarah's mothers were when they were born.

The language didn't say that it would be instantaneous. . .the language speaks of a process--dying. . .your days start decreasing the day you are born.

Again, while a homiletic interpretation could be made, that isn't the simple meaning of the text.

Where is that in the Genesis account?

More to the point, where, in the text of Genesis, does it say that the serpent IS the embodiment of evil?

I can tell you - it isn't there. The snake is simply a snake. It is a Christian assumption that the snake was Satan, or the Devil, or something like that.

It certainly isn't in the Hebrew. There, it simply says that the snake was the most crafty of animals. A thinking animal does not necessarily mean an EVIL animal...

 

[Harmonious]

My complaint was that he had no clue what he was doing, other than ripping off some dictionary. His later posts clarify that point.

Fair enough.

 

[smokydot]

When you quote Scripture why not provide the chapter and verse to avoid any ambiguity?

That would be:

Gen 3:1, "Hath God said,"

Gen 3:3, "or you will die."

What lie or lies did the Serpent tell? [Please provide chapter and verse]
BigRed

Gen 3:4, "You will not surely die."

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Actually, you are wrong.

The doubled language of the word dying, Mot tamut, doesn't work the way you suggest. The repetition is only for emphasis, not to give a secondary dying.

A homiletic case could be made that the repetition could actually mean that, but that is not the simple function of the words. (It DOES help to actually know the Hebrew.)

It's particularly offensive when someone like this makes up something about the Hebrew (or Greek, etc) and then arrogantly refuses to be corrected by someone who knows better. This same person can then have the gall to call other people ignorant.

I worked my butt off to learn Hebrew and Greek (and a handful of other languages). I hate it when people make stuff up.

 

[Harmonious]

It's particularly offensive when someone like this makes up something about the Hebrew (or Greek, etc) and then arrogantly refuses to be corrected by someone who knows better. This same person can then have the gall to call other people ignorant.

I worked my butt off to learn Hebrew and Greek (and a handful of other languages). I hate it when people make stuff up.

I know. But there are some people who insist: "I've made up my mind - don't confuse me with the facts."