The OT today

[Shermana]

Jesus did fulfill the Law perfectly.(Matthew 5:17,18)

The meaning of the word "fulfilled" has been brutally abused by antinomians for centuries.
Here's what it actually means:

Completion: Fulfilling Torah and Prophets (Messianic Judaism)

 

[metis]

I did not say God made mistakes. The Jewish nation repeatedly violated the Law, and were eventually rejected by God. As the Bible explains; "For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second; for he does find fault with the people when he says: “‘Look! There are days coming,’ says Jehovah, ‘and I will conclude with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah a new covenant; not according to the covenant that I made with their forefathers in the day of my taking hold of their hand to bring them forth out of the land of Egypt, because they did not continue in my covenant, so that I stopped caring for them,’ says Jehovah.” (Hebrews 8:7-9)

OK, two posts back to back, starting with this one:

Genesis 17:[7] And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you.

Genesis 17:[13] both he that is born in your house and he that is bought with your money, shall be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant.

Deuteronomy 7:[9] Know therefore that the LORD your God is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and steadfast love with those who love him and keep his commandments, to a thousand generations,

Deuteronomy 29:[12] that you may enter into the sworn covenant of the LORD your God, which the LORD your God makes with you this day;
[13] that he may establish you this day as his people, and that he may be your God, as he promised you, and as he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.

Psalms 89:[34] I will not violate my covenant,
or alter the word that went forth from my lips.

Psalms 105:[8] He is mindful of his covenant for ever,
of the word that he commanded, for a thousand generations,

Isaiah 44:[21] Remember these things, O Jacob,
and Israel, for you are my servant;
I formed you, you are my servant;
O Israel, you will not be forgotten by me.

Isaiah 45:[17] But Israel is saved by the LORD
with everlasting salvation;
you shall not be put to shame or confounded
to all eternity.

Isaiah 52:[1] Awake, awake,
put on your strength, O Zion;
put on your beautiful garments,
O Jerusalem, the holy city;
for there shall no more come into you
the uncircumcised and the unclean.


Isaiah 59:[20] "And he will come to Zion as Redeemer,
to those in Jacob who turn from transgression, says the LORD.
[21] "And as for me, this is my covenant with them, says the LORD: my spirit which is upon you, and my words which I have put in your mouth, shall not depart out of your mouth, or out of the mouth of your children, or out of the mouth of your children's children, says the LORD, from this time forth and for evermore."

Isaiah 66:[22] "For as the new heavens and the new earth
which I will make
shall remain before me, says the LORD;
so shall your descendants and your name remain.

 

[metis]

And here's the other:

Deuteronomy 42): "your G-d…shall not add to what I have commanded you or subtract."

Dt. 13(1): "You shall be careful to observe, neither adding to it or subtracting."

Dt. 13(5): "His commandment you shall observe, holding fast to Him alone."

Dt. 29(28): "Concerns us and our descendents forever, that we may carry out all the words of this Law."

Joshua 1(5): "I will not leave or forsake you…(7) observe the entire Law … do not swerve from it."

Psalms 19(8): "The Law of the Lord is perfect… (10) the ordinances of the Lord are true; all of them are just."

Ps. 119(160): "permanence is Your words chief trait, each of Your just ordinances is everlasting."

Isaiah 42(21): "pleased the Lord in His justice to make His Law great and glorious."

Is. 66(17): "they who eat swine’s flesh … shall all perish."

Baruch 4(1): "the Law endures forever."

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

I believe that the sabbath was not to be observed forever. Exodus 31:16 says; " And the sons of Israel must keep the sabbath, so as to carry out the sabbath during their generations. It is a covenant to time indefinite. Between me and the sons of Israel it is a sign to time indefinite." Note also that only the Jews were required to keep the sabbath, not non-Jews. The period of required sabbath keeping for the Jews would be indefinite. The Hebrew word ʽoh·lam′ does not, in itself, mean forever. Because the Jews violated the Law repeatedly, eventually Jehovah would replace the Law covenant with a better covenant.

Yeah only Jews are required to keep the Hebrew laws, just like they are today!
I think time indefinite means forever. So individual Jews broke the Sabbath like individual JWs break Jesus' commandments all the time!!
I don't think it was God who replaced the Law. When God gave the Laws to the Jews he gave them directly to Moses. He spoke to the Jews directly at Mount Sinai.
The NT laws were not given directly by God.

 

[CMike]

I did not say God made mistakes. The Jewish nation repeatedly violated the Law, and were eventually rejected by God. As the Bible explains; "For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second; for he does find fault with the people when he says: “‘Look! There are days coming,’ says Jehovah, ‘and I will conclude with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah a new covenant; not according to the covenant that I made with their forefathers in the day of my taking hold of their hand to bring them forth out of the land of Egypt, because they did not continue in my covenant, so that I stopped caring for them,’ says Jehovah.” (Hebrews 8:7-9)

The Christian bible has no relevance for the Torah or the Jews.

 

[CMike]

Yeah only Jews are required to keep the Hebrew laws, just like they are today!
I think time indefinite means forever. So individual Jews broke the Sabbath like individual JWs break Jesus' commandments all the time!!
I don't think it was God who replaced the Law. When God gave the Laws to the Jews he gave them directly to Moses. He spoke to the Jews directly at Mount Sinai.
The NT laws were not given directly by God.

Very true.

 

[psychoslice]

My god I hope the laws are not in use today, they are so stone aged and barberic, of course if you believe in stoning your child to death for being naughty, then they might work for you.

 

[Shermana]

The Christian bible has no relevance for the Torah or the Jews.

Well you can read Matthew 5 as a commentary on the Torah. For example, do Jews today practice Eye for an eye literally and strictly as Jesus said not to do? And his thing on Divorce was basically just the Shammai position.

Much of what Jesus says is directly stated in the Talmud.

 

[CMike]

Well you can read Matthew 5 as a commentary on the Torah. For example, do Jews today practice Eye for an eye literally and strictly as Jesus said not to do? And his thing on Divorce was basically just the Shammai position.

Much of what Jesus says is directly stated in the Talmud.

Eye for an eye always meant compensation with money.

Jesus' commentary on it couldn't be more irrelevant to Jews.

Divorce even according to shammi was always allowed.

G-d talks about divorce in the Torah.

There is a whole book on marriage and divorce in the Talmud.

 

[CMike]

My god I hope the laws are not in use today, they are so stone aged and barberic, of course if you believe in stoning your child to death for being naughty, then they might work for you.

Your understanding is very poor.

 

[Shermana]

Eye for an eye always meant compensation with money.

Jesus' commentary on it couldn't be more irrelevant to Jews.

Divorce even according to shammi was always allowed.

G-d talks about divorce in the Torah.

There is a whole book on marriage and divorce in the Talmud.

Shammai was of the position that divorce is only allowed from adultery, correct? As opposed to Hillel who said burnt toast is a justified reason?

Also, do orthodox Jews even practice "eye for an eye" to the full, strict extent in monetary compensation or are they more forgiving and lenient as Jesus teaches on it?

 

[CMike]

Shammai was of the position that divorce is only allowed from adultery, correct? As opposed to Hillel who said burnt toast is a justified reason?

Also, do orthodox Jews even practice "eye for an eye" to the full, strict extent in monetary compensation or are they more forgiving and lenient as Jesus teaches on it?

I am not quite sure I understand your question.

However, what jesus said about divorce is totally irrelevant to jews.

Eye for an eye always meant to compensate with money if you injure someone.

Divorce has always been allowed. There is an entire book in the Talmud about divorce.

The five books of Moses G-D speaks about divorce.

The jewish view on divorce is that it's certainly not encouraged. However, it's sometimes necessary. It's almost considered like the loss of a limb.

Shammai generally took the more stringent approach than Hillel.

Kudos to you for knowing about Rabbi Hillel and Shammai and their opinions :clap

Here is a little more about it.

When to Get Divorced - Chassidic Thought

___________________​

When is it time to get a divorce? The Talmud cites three opinions:

The School of Shammai rules: A man should not divorce his wife unless he discovers in her an immoral matter...

The School of Hillel holds: [He may divorce her] even if she burnt his meal.

Rabbi Akiva says: Even if he found another more beautiful than she.


(All three opinions derive from the same verse in the Torah --Deuteronomy 24:1--in the section dealing with the laws of divorce, depending on how a key phrase in that verse is interpreted.)

The halachah (final legal ruling) follows the opinion of the sages of Hillel. But pious behavior (midat chassidut), which holds itself to a standard "beyond the letter of the law," is to accept the stricter criteria put forth by the disciples of Shammai.
In other words, a "divorce" is justified if there is actual damage to your well-being and deprivation of your needs.

If you find yourself wed to a life that nightly burns your supper, fouling or depriving you of your material nourishment or spiritual nurture, the Torah understands and condones your decision to sever that relationship and seek a better "marriage."

That is the "letter of the law." But a more altruistic approach states that unless your current situation in life spells a violation of your ethical, moral and religious values (in which case even the sages of Shammai permit, indeed obligate, a dissolution of the marriage) the place to be is the place where you are.

Your Creator has placed you there; He has also given you the resources and fortitude to make it work. Sticking it out is not a cop-out--it is to rise to the greater challenge of uncovering those resources and redeeming the "sparks of G-dliness" entrusted to your care.

 

[Shermana]

The School of Shammai rules: A man should not divorce his wife unless he discovers in her an immoral matter...

Exactly, hence Jesus simply takes Shammai's position on Divorce, so it's not really anti-Torah as many claim.

My question was, if Jesus's teaching on Eye for an eye is really that much different than what the Rabbis had to say about it. He didn't flat out say "Do away with it altogether".

 

[Tiberius]

Looking for an adaptive methodology in religious scripture... I like the challenge you've presented here.

Thanks.

I propose that, regardless of what any OT proponent offers as an answer, the truth is that if some "OT law" aligns with what is viewed as socially acceptable (don't steal), then that law applies. It a particular "OT law" does not align with what is currently deemed socially acceptable (stone unruly children TO DEATH), then that law does not apply.

Isn't that just painting the bullseye around the arrow after you've fired it into the target? Just goes to show that, just as you said, the laws are a construct of humans, not a deity.

 

[Tiberius]

I believe the Law that God gave Moses for the nation of Israel is no longer binding or in force. So Christians need not observe a weekly sabbath, for example, as the Mosaic Law requires. (Galatians 3:13, Romans 6:14) The Mosaic Law was fulfilled and replaced by the law of Christ.(Galatians 6:2)

I know that a great many Christians disagree, citing the passages that say that not one iota shall be changed.

Does this mean the Hebrew Scriptures do not apply to us? I believe they certainly do apply. Any sacred pronouncement of God can give us insight into God's thinking.

But does he still think the same way now? Apparently not, if he's decided that those laws which he once thought were so important are no unimportant in today's life.

Many of the commands stated in the Law of Moses were restated as binding on Christians. (Romans 13:9,10) The examples in the history recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures, as well as prophecies and direction given, are IMO, part of the "All Scripture ...inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,*so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16,17)

Doesn't this suggest that the OT is still binding on us today, in contradiction to your earlier claim that it wasn't?

 

[Tiberius]

Some apply and others don't depending on your particular biases and agenda. There's so much to pick and choose from, you're sure to find a combination of biblical laws that suit your specific needs.

One would think that if there really were a god that he'd make it a bit clearer which ones still applied or not.

 

[Hawkins]

The big picture is that, if Adam failed to keep God's Law, when he's inside the Kingdom of God (living with God), it is expected that no humans can actually keep God's Law. This simply means all humans may have to die (second death) in front of God's Law ever since Adam. This is what Roman 5:14 trying to say. That is, even before Mosaic Law was put in place, death reigned over everyone including those who didn't break an obvious command as Adam did. It is because God's Law is always in place. And sin at anytime is a breaking of God's Law (the various forms of God's Law) one way or another.

At the same time, it says that God's Law is not completely equivalent to Mosaic Law. Mosaic Law is a covenantal Law. A covenant is composed of basically 3 important parts. 1) Law (covenantal law) and commandments, 2) Grace, and 3) a scope covering a certain group of humans. Mosaic Law is such a covenantal law attached to a covenant with a scope covering the Jews.

It is because humans ever since Adam cannot keep God's Law in complete (as witnessed and proven in the period between Adam and Noah), a covenant is needed for humans to be saved at all. A covenant simply means "You don't need to obey God's Law in complete, but you only need to obey the partial law specified in a covenant" such that you can be saved. Humans don't need to keep God's Law in full but only the covenantal law to be saved because God has grace for humans through each and every covenant. God doesn't need humans agreement but enforces a covenant to a group of humans simply because humans can only be saved through a covenant.

And the Grace part of a covenant is usually in the form of Faith, that is, God's Grace is usually granted through faith. And faith can save because in the end Jesus Christ will make a sacrifice. To simply put, humans don't need to (and can't) keep God's Law in full to be saved. They just need to keep what is said in a covenant. It is so because each covenant contains God's Grace through Jesus Christ.

As a result, the New (Second) Covenant is a far more advanced covenant. Whoever covered by this covenant no longer needs to subject himself to the judgment of Law. The Grace through Christ is complete in this covenant. This covenant is permanent and eternal. The Law/Commandment part of this covenant is kept to a minimal while its Grace is maximized that mostly you need only Faith in Christ to be saved.

The same verse also reflects the fact that after Adam being driven out of Eden, humans are no longer inside God's Kingdom and no longer living with God directly as Adam did. Under this circumstance, humans will be more and more sinful as time goes by, and generations after generations. In effect more and more humans will be "sentenced to death" in front of Law (covenantal Law). However, God will increase the "Grace" portion and decrease the "Law/Commandment" portion through each of His successive covenant, until the final one - the Second Covenant which is permanent and eternal! (with the Law/Commandment portion minimized and the Grace/Faith portion maximized).

 

[Hawkins]

One would think that if there really were a god that he'd make it a bit clearer which ones still applied or not.

As long as humans exist, there will always a group of them never understand no matter what.

Don't over estimate the so-called human wisdom.

 

[CMike]

One would think that if there really were a god that he'd make it a bit clearer which ones still applied or not.

It's clear to Jews.

 

[CMike]

The big picture is that, if Adam failed to keep God's Law, when he's inside the Kingdom of God (living with God), it is expected that no humans can actually keep God's Law. This simply means all humans may have to die (second death) in front of God's Law ever since Adam. This is what Roman 5:14 trying to say. That is, even before Mosaic Law was put in place, death reigned over everyone including those who didn't break an obvious command as Adam did. It is because God's Law is always in place. And sin at anytime is a breaking of God's Law (the various forms of God's Law) one way or another.

At the same time, it says that God's Law is not completely equivalent to Mosaic Law. Mosaic Law is a covenantal Law. A covenant is composed of basically 3 important parts. 1) Law (covenantal law) and commandments, 2) Grace, and 3) a scope covering a certain group of humans. Mosaic Law is such a covenantal law attached to a covenant with a scope covering the Jews.

It is because humans ever since Adam cannot keep God's Law in complete (as witnessed and proven in the period between Adam and Noah), a covenant is needed for humans to be saved at all. A covenant simply means "You don't need to obey God's Law in complete, but you only need to obey the partial law specified in a covenant" such that you can be saved. Humans don't need to keep God's Law in full but only the covenantal law to be saved because God has grace for humans through each and every covenant. God doesn't need humans agreement but enforces a covenant to a group of humans simply because humans can only be saved through a covenant.

And the Grace part of a covenant is usually in the form of Faith, that is, God's Grace is usually granted through faith. And faith can save because in the end Jesus Christ will make a sacrifice. To simply put, humans don't need to (and can't) keep God's Law in full to be saved. They just need to keep what is said in a covenant. It is so because each covenant contains God's Grace through Jesus Christ.

As a result, the New (Second) Covenant is a far more advanced covenant. Whoever covered by this covenant no longer needs to subject himself to the judgment of Law. The Grace through Christ is complete in this covenant. This covenant is permanent and eternal. The Law/Commandment part of this covenant is kept to a minimal while its Grace is maximized that mostly you need only Faith in Christ to be saved.

The same verse also reflects the fact that after Adam being driven out of Eden, humans are no longer inside God's Kingdom and no longer living with God directly as Adam did. Under this circumstance, humans will be more and more sinful as time goes by, and generations after generations. In effect more and more humans will be "sentenced to death" in front of Law (covenantal Law). However, God will increase the "Grace" portion and decrease the "Law/Commandment" portion through each of His successive covenant, until the final one - the Second Covenant which is permanent and eternal! (with the Law/Commandment portion minimized and the Grace/Faith portion maximized).

G-d disagrees with you.