Torah in Christianity

[Brickjectivity]

We can agree that a circumcised heart is essential to the keeping of the law. Outward observance is not enough for God.

I am not sure we are agreed, because I am saying outward observance of the law requires and leads to internal observance. I'm not sure we are in agreement, yet.

Deuteronomy 30:6 does not say that the heart of the Jew under the law is circumcised. Based on the Abrahamic covenant, the requirement was to do as commanded, and receive outward circumcision. But outward circumcision is not proof of inward circumcision of the heart. If lsrael had been obedient to all the Law they would have pleased God and been blessed in their land. History proves otherwise.

It is a comment in Deuteronomy that shows the general idea is not outward observance but total observance, and it shows this is not new, not introduced with Christ. The revealed mystery is "Christ in you, the hope of glory" but not an end to the law. If the Jews cease, their scriptures will be lost; and the expansion of the children of Abraham does not make the torah keeper irrelevant.

There are other passages of scripture, found amongst the Prophets, that clearly demonstrate that God was not happy with the hearts of men under the law.

Jeremiah 24:7. 'And l will give them an heart to know me, that l am the LORD: and they shall be my people, and l will be their God: for they shall return unto me with their whole heart'.

Ezekiel 11:19,20. 'And l will give them one heart, and l will put a new spirit within you; and l will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:
That they may walk in my statutes, and keep mine ordinances, and do them: and they shall be my people, and l shall be their God'.

Do you notice that the future tense is used? When do you think lsrael received this 'new spirit' and 'heart of flesh'?

If lsrael hasn't yet received a new spirit or heart of flesh, why are you claiming that the law is sufficient in bringing men to a knowledge of God?

Moses says they will fall away and be brought back, and fall away and be brought back. Its a cycle, and it is alluded to Proverbs and Psalms also. Isaiah and Jeremiah talk about the same thing. Yes they do cry out when there is a new refinement to be made and when Israel is about to go through trouble, but they always announce that Israel will be brought back. The falling away is part of a process of refinement, not a process of destruction. It is very similar to what happens with Christians who fall away and are drawn back. Its a cycle where the person comes to realize they've made a mistake, and they learn and are changed.

The Psalms declare that the law converts the soul.

• [Psa 19:7-8 KJV] 7 The law of the LORD [is] perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD [is] sure, making wise the simple. 8 The statutes of the LORD [are] right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD [is] pure, enlightening the eyes.

In other words it reforms hearts. This is also beautiful in stories like the story of Ruth, but the law is about taking care of orphans and widows and weak people and is about not killing and generally is about reforming hearts. Also it is about freeing hearts, so people who come from a background of slavery can be free in their minds and not just in their bodies. And that is why Christians should continue to study it, because we can learn that way.

So, yes it is sufficient to bring people to a knowledge of God, and we have a scripture in 1John which says anyone who loves (with agape) is born of God and knows God. There are such people in scripture stories, such as Abigail the wife of Naboth. There are some real heart changed people. Samuel and David are a couple more. It might also help to meet some modern Jews many of whom will demonstrate some real spiritual fruit.

 

[Harel13]

Xianity was never the answer for Jews, it was made for Edom, by Paul.
Xianity has almost nothing to do with Yeshua's teachings, which were about t'shuvah.
Of course, it didn't take long for things to go completely wrong, so IMHO then G-d
tried again with our brother Ishmael. Personally, I don't know how well that's going,
but the plain fact is that G-d is no longer interacting with humans, as far as I can tell.

Okay, I understand your view now. Thanks.

 

[Redemptionsong]

The *** is a work animal, a symbol of peace. A horse, as would be expected, is a symbol of war.

How, therefore, do you reconcile the two appearances of the same Messiah?

 

[rosends]

How, therefore, do you reconcile the two appearances of the same Messiah?

What do you mean "two appearances"? There is one appearance. The discussion is whether the second description is just an expansion on the first, or whether the text provides two possibilities because either one portrays the requisite humility.

For more reading, see here.

 

[Redemptionsong]

I am not sure we are agreed, because I am saying outward observance of the law requires and leads to internal observance. I'm not sure we are in agreement, yet.

If this is what you're saying then we are not agreed!

Scripture teaches that the tree is known by its fruit. A good tree gives forth good fruit, and a corrupt tree gives forth corrupt fruit [Matthew 12:33].

You are trying to turn this around. You're saying that good fruit can grow on a corrupt tree, and make the tree good! This is not what scripture teaches.

What happens when new wine is placed in old wine bottles? [Matt.9:17]

 

[Redemptionsong]

What do you mean "two appearances"? There is one appearance. The discussion is whether the second description is just an expansion on the first, or whether the text provides two possibilities because either one portrays the requisite humility.

For more reading, see here.

Your hyperlink does not suggest an answer to the problem of why the Messiah should appear 'lowly' if he has come to destroy his enemies and bring salvation to Jerusalem.

 

[Redemptionsong]

The revealed mystery is "Christ in you, the hope of glory" but not an end to the law. If the Jews cease, their scriptures will be lost; and the expansion of the children of Abraham does not make the torah keeper irrelevant.

It's clear from the writings of Paul that lsrael is not lost. Nevertheless, there is a very important truth that lsrael has failed to acknowledge.

Here are Paul's words:
'Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.
For l bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.
For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousnesss of God.
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth'.[Romans 10:1-4]

 

[rosends]

Your hyperlink does not suggest an answer to the problem of why the Messiah should appear 'lowly' if he has come to destroy his enemies and bring salvation to Jerusalem.

Actually, it does. Re read the Malbim's understanding. Of course, you could also look at Rashi on the verse and, though I like the Abarbenels' discussion, a simpler summary is found in the Metzudat David, "יהיה מוכנע וירכב על חמור או על עיר בן מאחת האתונות והוא מדת ענוה"

 

[Brickjectivity]

You are trying to turn this around. You're saying that good fruit can grow on a corrupt tree, and make the tree good! This is not what scripture teaches.

I don't know why you'd think so. Can not a nation repent? We both know that they can, and so the tree analogy is not clear. Trees cannot repent.

It's clear from the writings of Paul that lsrael is not lost. Nevertheless, there is a very important truth that lsrael has failed to acknowledge.

Here are Paul's words:
'Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.
For l bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.
For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousnesss of God.
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth'.[Romans 10:1-4]

That at least is Paul being consistent with himself. He's unhappy that his own family, the Jews, are not on board. His prayer is that Israel might be preserved, but I also recall that Israel is judged one generation at a time. If Israel were completely cut off then people would say that the L_RD took Israel out of Egypt but couldn't fulfill the promises to them. To this day they have never had all of the promises fulfilled, yet; so if they were destroyed it would look very bad. Also Christianity and Islam would both also be negatively affected. The reference for this is

• [Deu 9:28 NIV] 28 Otherwise, the country from which you brought us will say, 'Because the LORD was not able to take them into the land he had promised them, and because he hated them, he brought them out to put them to death in the wilderness.'

 

[Redemptionsong]

I don't know why you'd think so. Can not a nation repent? We both know that they can, and so the tree analogy is not clear. Trees cannot repent.


That at least is Paul being consistent with himself. He's unhappy that his own family, the Jews, are not on board. His prayer is that Israel might be preserved, but I also recall that Israel is judged one generation at a time. If Israel were completely cut off then people would say that the L_RD took Israel out of Egypt but couldn't fulfill the promises to them. To this day they have never had all of the promises fulfilled, yet; so if they were destroyed it would look very bad. Also Christianity and Islam would both also be negatively affected. The reference for this is

• [Deu 9:28 NIV] 28 Otherwise, the country from which you brought us will say, 'Because the LORD was not able to take them into the land he had promised them, and because he hated them, he brought them out to put them to death in the wilderness.'

Jesus spoke these words, Luke 6:43-45.
'For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit, neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.
A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of his heart his mouth speaketh'.

A nation cannot repent unless it speaks with one voice.

There is every reason to believe that 'all lsrael shall be saved'. But, who are 'lsrael'?

 

[MyM]

This is in religious debates and so is open to everyone.

In trying to understand Christianity and what underpins it, I keep coming up against essentially the belief that the Torah isn't enough, it's not good enough, it doesn't do this or that.

Psalm 19 says 'The Law of the Lord is perfect', and the Torah in Deut 4 says not to add or take away from it, and in Deut 30 it says it is not far away, hard to do etc.

Can someone please explain to me, if the Torah is perfect, which the Tanakh says it is, why is Jesus or Christianity as a whole necessary? There shouldn't be any need for any 'new' revelation or upgrade, per the Torah itself (it would be adding or taking away).

Can you still have Christianity if you believe the Torah is perfect? I don't believe you can.

You cannot take the first 5 books of the Bible as the Torah. That should cover most of your questions

 

[Mister Emu]

No, because the minute the circumstances are optimal again the Torah can be observed the way it's meant to be. The circumstances aren't meant to change for the worse.

No, they changed for the better. Not reflecting in any way on the perfection of the Torah as it had been received.

Understanding that the Torah can be both perfect and a reflection of less than ideal circumstances must necessarily include the possibility that the Torah as received by Moses was itself a perfect law meant for less than perfect circumstances. No savior, humanity divided into the chosen people and those not so chosen, etc.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Jesus spoke these words, Luke 6:43-45.
'For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit, neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.
A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of his heart his mouth speaketh'.

Another great interpretation of Jesus words here in Luke 6 comes to us through James who comments that we who praise God should not denounce people, since people are made in God's image. It is as if we are denouncing God, in other words. Instead let God be the judge, and let us praise that which is praiseworthy and think on good things.

• [Jas 3:10 NIV] 10 Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be.

But this is easier said than done. Who can be so tactful? I have seen people who could, and they were the best most amiable people. It is surprising how gentle sunshine accomplishes far more than any cold wind no matter how harsh.

This verse is also a opportunity to mention that we should start calling the NT "New Treasure" instead of "New Testament". In the first place, a testament cannot be antiquated. Word drift has made 'Old' mean 'Antiquated', so by calling one 'New' we are unintentionally derogatory about the other. It is fair to say "first and second" but not "New and Old" since it sounds as if one can be antiquated. One is old treasure, treasure being something which does not rot with age, and one is new treasure. Or we could call them first treasure and second treasure, but 'Old testament' is a misleading term. The term 'Old' used to be more suitable, but the meaning has drifted to be synonymous with 'Antiquated'. It is no longer appropriate. I generally say NT in posts and never use the term 'Old testament' instead using 'Tanach' or 'Pentateuch' or sometimes 'Jewish scriptures'.

 

[Brickjectivity]

A nation cannot repent unless it speaks with one voice.

There is every reason to believe that 'all lsrael shall be saved'. But, who are 'lsrael'?

Ten righteous can save a city, and one can delay its destruction.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Another great interpretation of Jesus words here in Luke 6 comes to us through James who comments that we who praise God should not denounce people, since people are made in God's image. It is as if we are denouncing God, in other words. Instead let God be the judge, and let us praise that which is praiseworthy and think on good things.

• [Jas 3:10 NIV] 10 Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be.

But this is easier said than done. Who can be so tactful? I have seen people who could, and they were the best most amiable people. It is surprising how gentle sunshine accomplishes far more than any cold wind no matter how harsh.

This verse is also a opportunity to mention that we should start calling the NT "New Treasure" instead of "New Testament". In the first place, a testament cannot be antiquated. Word drift has made 'Old' mean 'Antiquated', so by calling one 'New' we are unintentionally derogatory about the other. It is fair to say "first and second" but not "New and Old" since it sounds as if one can be antiquated. One is old treasure, treasure being something which does not rot with age, and one is new treasure. Or we could call them first treasure and second treasure, but 'Old testament' is a misleading term. The term 'Old' used to be more suitable, but the meaning has drifted to be synonymous with 'Antiquated'. It is no longer appropriate. I generally say NT in posts and never use the term 'Old testament' instead using 'Tanach' or 'Pentateuch' or sometimes 'Jewish scriptures'.

I believe it's right to challenge teaching that is not in accord with one's understanding of scripture. Only through the appropriate and consistent application of scripture is it possible to clarify one's own thinking and persuade others of their error. At the end of the day, it's God's Spirit that we hope will lead our thinking and mould our understanding.

IMO, the use of the word 'new' in relation to the covenant made with God in Christ is actually very apt. But, sometimes the use of 'Tanakh', or 'Hebrew scriptures' is helpful when talking about the OT, dependent on the audience.

The reason l believe that the word 'new' is appropriate is that a person 'born again' of the Holy Spirit is also described as 'a new creation [creature]'. The Law has remained unchanged, but one's relationship to righteousness has changed.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Ten righteous can save a city, and one can delay its destruction.

Yes, but sadly ten righteous souls could not be found, and Sodom was destroyed!

 

[Sedim Haba]

Actually, it does. Re read the Malbim's understanding. Of course, you could also look at Rashi on the verse and, though I like the Abarbenels' discussion, a simpler summary is found in the Metzudat David, "יהיה מוכנע וירכב על חמור או על עיר בן מאחת האתונות והוא מדת ענוה"

Please don't post the Hebrew without translation. WHY? To impress? Intimidate?

 

[Sedim Haba]

You cannot take the first 5 books of the Bible as the Torah. That should cover most of your questions

The Torah is contained within. Much is narrative. BUT do you accept any of it? Don't you proclaim it's corrupt? Isn't that disingenuous to comment on Torah?

 

[Brickjectivity]

I believe it's right to challenge teaching that is not in accord with one's understanding of scripture. Only through the appropriate and consistent application of scripture is it possible to clarify one's own thinking and persuade others of their error. At the end of the day, it's God's Spirit that we hope will lead our thinking and mould our understanding.

• [Lam 3:26-31 NIV] 28 Let him sit alone in silence, for the LORD has laid it on him. 29 Let him bury his face in the dust--there may yet be hope. 30 Let him offer his cheek to one who would strike him, and let him be filled with disgrace. 31 For no one is cast off by the Lord forever.

Jews can do the above but we cannot? I think we are acting like children right now, arguing, performing for spectacle.

• [Luk 7:32, 35 NIV] 32 They are like children sitting in the marketplace and calling out to each other: " 'We played the pipe for you, and you did not dance; we sang a dirge, and you did not cry.' ... 35 But wisdom is proved right by all her children."

Here is a series of scripture verses against what we are doing:

Spoiler: series

• [1Co 8:1 NIV] 1 Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that "We all possess knowledge." But knowledge puffs up while love builds up.
• [Jas 3:6 NIV] 6 The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole body, sets the whole course of one's life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.
• [2Co 10:5 NIV] 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
• [Pro 17:19 NIV] 19 Whoever loves a quarrel loves sin; whoever builds a high gate invites destruction.
• [Pro 17:14 NIV] 14 Starting a quarrel is like breaching a dam; so drop the matter before a dispute breaks out.
• [Pro 15:18 NIV] 18 A hot-tempered person stirs up conflict, but the one who is patient calms a quarrel.
• [Pro 20:3 NIV] 3 It is to one's honor to avoid strife, but every fool is quick to quarrel.
• [Pro 26:20 NIV] 20 Without wood a fire goes out; without a gossip a quarrel dies down.
• [Mat 12:19 NIV] 19 He will not quarrel or cry out; no one will hear his voice in the streets.
• [Pro 26:20 NIV] 20 Without wood a fire goes out; without a gossip a quarrel dies down.
• [Jas 4:2 NIV] 2 You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight. You do not have because you do not ask God.
• [1Pe 4:8 NIV] 8 Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins.

Where this leads is to church splits. There is a long history. Friendly debate turns into concern, turns into division. Instead let people die of old age, taking their debates and ignorance with them. We'll all be better off. Just roll it all back, erase all of the arguments, burn the libraries of discussions. They are pride, because once we have put our foot down and stood for some argument we think is right we are embarrassed to change our minds. That is human nature and the greatest weakness of the churches.

• [1Co 11:18, 20 NIV] 18 In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. ... 20 So then, when you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat,

it is not the lord's table

 

[Rival]

No, they changed for the better. Not reflecting in any way on the perfection of the Torah as it had been received.

Understanding that the Torah can be both perfect and a reflection of less than ideal circumstances must necessarily include the possibility that the Torah as received by Moses was itself a perfect law meant for less than perfect circumstances. No savior, humanity divided into the chosen people and those not so chosen, etc.

You think Judaism is better without a temple? How? When that's a requirement? How can the Torah be perfect, in this case? It's not that the Torah is a reflection of less than ideal circumstances, but that it exists within a less than ideal circumstance, e.g., there being no Temple. The Torah envisions an ideal Israel wherein all of its laws can be observed. It sounds as though your issue is boarder than Torah, and is going into the idea of the Israelites as a chosen people and whatnot. I see no need for a savour, either.

In any case, I think we're done here, really.