| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| True North |
Posted - 12 Feb 2003 : 21:58:43
God's instructions consist of torah shebiktav, wrtitten torah, or what is known as the pentateuch. These five books of Moses-Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy were given to Israel at Sinai. Israel's sages believed that Moses received further oral instruction or torah shebe'al pe.
During the time of Yeshua, the orthodox view was that this Oral Torah had been handed down from generation to generation. The Oral Torah included the precepts and interpretations implied in the Written Torah. It also came to include the legal decisions of rabbinic courts and the oral traditions of their predecessors.
The body of legal precedent that develops as judges hand down rulings which interpret the laws of legislators is analogous to the Oral Torah. The written law is applied as cases are brought forward that create a tradition of interpretations and precedents which are no less authoritive than the laws themselves.
The traditions of the elders claimed an authority and continuity equal to that of the Written Torah. It claimed authenticity as a living interpretation and essential complement to Written Torah above the Oral Torah only with the Written Torah as its foundation. The changes in the traditions brought the need for interpretation but the Oral and Written Torah were dependent upon one another.
The Mishnah was the first compilation of Oral Torah authored by Rabbi Yehuda ha-Nazi about 200 AD. Tradition was to hand the Oral Torah down orally but once the tradition was broken, other collections of Oral Torah were incorporated, such as the commentary on the Mishnah known as Gemara. The writings were eventually put together as the Talmud. The Jerusalem Talmud, compiled in Israel, and the Babylonian Talmud compiled by Jewish sages in Babylon. They differ but the Mishna in both is Rabbi Yehuda's.
The Written Torah is not viewed as something separate from the Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud is central in Jewish education. A thorough knowledge of Written Torah is a prerequisite to Talmudic study as it is the foundation of the "house" of Talmud. As in the days of Yeshua, every Orthodox Jewish child grows up learning the bible with the Pentateuch the all important first step to learning Talmud.
Yeshua attached great importance to the Oral Torah unwritten in his day. This is evidenced in Matthew 23:3 when he admonishes his disciples to "do and observe everything they (the scribes and Pharisees) command you". He was referring to the Pharisee's oral traditions and interpretations of the Written Torah. The written Torah could not been in question, for it was accepted by all sects of Judaism. Further evidence comes from Yeshua when he said in Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. The jot is the yod of the Hebrew language and the kotz is the tittle and of course the law is Torah.
Further indirect but obvious evidence is that Yeshua was never charged with breaking any part of Torah. The disciples were accused of disobeying aspects of Oral Torah in Luke 6:1-2 but the only accusation against Yeshua was for breaking Sabbath by healing the sick (Luke 14:1-4).
Christian lack of knowledge of Jewish custom has led to misunderstanding Yeshua. His focus was never on himself but on God. A major misunderstanding of Jewish Oral Torah comes in not knowing the rabbinic prohibition against using the unutterable name of God. The original understanding of the third commandment of Exodus 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. Also the the original malkut shamaiyim (Kingdom of Heaven) is common in Hebrew literature of the period while Kingdom of God is not. The most common word for God used by Yeshua was "heaven". This is seen in Matthew 21:25 "The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven (ie: from God), or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?
Another example of rabbinic sophistication is recorded in Matthew 26:64, "Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven". The right hand of power hints at two messianic passages from scripture, Daniel 7:13 and Psalm 110:1.
Credit for the research goes to David Bivin, director of the Jerusalem School for the Study of the Synoptic Gospels and publisher of the Jerusalem Perspective.
|
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| BatKol |
Posted - 19 Feb 2004 : 10:46:01
P.S. - A "voice" in and of itself is neither male nor female. |
| BatKol |
Posted - 19 Feb 2004 : 09:03:19
Greetings Manuel,
Yep, you got it right.. Heavenly Voice.. nice research. I am a singer and song writer and compose a good bit of my songs from
the words of the Psalms. My best piece (in my opinion) is Psalm 91.
I like to think that I co-wrote with David. The other song that everybody always wants to hear is "light of the world" which I wrote both lyrics and music to. I thought it tied in nicely for this group when talking scripture. I studied Hebrew to the intermediate level
and the phrase BatKol always stuck with me.
Yes, most definately the Talmud is in contra to Torah. Torah says the Mosheh wrote down ALL of the words so the oral torah is an invention of the rabbis.
Sorry it is taking me so long to get back on these posts. I am trying to get a good bit of work done before Pesach (passover) so
I can take a much needed break.
BK
|
| Manuel |
Posted - 17 Feb 2004 : 23:08:01
BatKol, I greet you In His name everlasting, Yahushuah.
I will follow up on these teachings you write of. Thank you for your response.
Do you find discrepencies on the written Laws Moses wrote down versus the oral, then written down on the Talmud?
Through His Grace and Light, I am, Father Willing,
Manuel
One more thought... I noticed the user-name you use on this ecclesia which is Bat Kol. What does Bat Kol mean? No ill intent, even though I have seen, felt and heard much, but from the first "searches" I gathered, it seemed that they where of a feminine status?
Addition per edit:
Definitions say that Bat Kol is a "heavenly voice," also say that it is "daughter from heaven," and heavenly divine commands from Father:
Genesis 3:9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?
Genesis 22:11 And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.
Exodus 3:4 And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I.
Deuteronomy 4:33 Did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live?
Job 38:1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
Daniel 4:31 While the word was in the king's mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, saying, O king Nebuchadnezzar, to thee it is spoken; The kingdom is departed from thee.
Matthew 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Matthew 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
Mark 1:11 And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Mark 9:7 And there was a cloud that overshadowed them: and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.
Luke 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.
Luke 9:35 And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.
John 12:28-30 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him. Jesus answered and said, This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes.
Acts 9:4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
2 Peter 1:17,18 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
Revelation 10:4 And when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not.
Revelation 11:12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.
Revelation 14:2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:
Revelation 14:13 And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.
Revelation 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
|
| BatKol |
Posted - 17 Feb 2004 : 22:10:50
Greeting Manuel,
You said: You say that the orthodox definition of a Jew is one who follows both the written and oral Torah (Talmud)." How and why was the Talmud an invention of the rabbis, and what rabbis are you writting of?
BatKol:
How: The Rabbis claim that the Talmud was given to Moses and was to remain in oral form. However the Torah states that Moses wrote down all the words that YHWH gave to him. This is the "how" of the invention. At the time of Christ the Talmud was still oral and there were various sects that focused around cetain teacher's interperatation of it. The school of Shami or Hillel, etc.
Why: Around 300AD because of dispersion it was decided that the oral teachings needed to be written down.
Manuel said: Why do orthos echo, as you write, "same accusation against ISRAEL?" And why do you also attach "as you all do here?"
BatKol: Because the ultra orthodox Rabbis complain that their is no Sovereignty for them and that ISRAEL is a FICTION of the UN. Torah is not the Law of the land there. It is a secular STATE and they know it. The same claim is made against the USA.
Manuel: Where can I read the Talmud, in order, as you say, read of "an invention of the rabbis,"
depending of whom these rabbis are?
BatKol: http://www.aishdas.org/webshas/
Hope this helps. I was going off of memory on the above but the link here should help.
|
| Manuel |
Posted - 17 Feb 2004 : 18:57:51
BatKol, I greet you In His name, Yahushuah, The Messiah.
Please bare with me here for I do not understand...
You say that the orthodox definition of a Jew is one who follows both the written and oral Torah (Talmud)." How and why was the Talmud an invention of the rabbis, and what rabbis are you writting of?
Why do orthos echo, as you write, "same accusation against ISRAEL?" And why do you also attach "as you all do here?"
Where can I read the Talmud, in order, as you say, read of "an invention of the rabbis,"
depending of whom these rabbis are?
Solely In His Grace, Yahushuah,I am,
Manuel |
| BatKol |
Posted - 17 Feb 2004 : 16:44:27
Manuel,
From my understanding these Jews are not real Jews. The orthodox definition of a "Jew" is one who follows both the written and oral Torah (Talmud). You and I both know the Talmud is an invention of the rabbis but never the less, the orthodox Jews view complience to both as manditory for being called a 'Jew'. From what I have witnessed in my studies, the orthodox do not consider these 'zionists' to be real Jews but rather atheists using the 'zionist' front to gain access to ISRAEL. Many orthos echo the same accusation against ISRAEL as you all do here. It is a FICTIONAL
STATE where Torah (both written and oral) is NOT endorsed. SOme Hassidim, such as the Satmars, will spit is you mention ISRAEL... So these false-zionists are not looked at as Jews but atheists by "real Jews".
I think this political problem goes beyond 'isms' and it is good to know what 'the others' are saying.
Check out: http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/ to see what these Jews say about ISRAEL.
|
| Manuel |
Posted - 12 Feb 2004 : 22:23:39
I Greet you all, In His name, Yahushuah,
As I read this article, much was revealed:
The New Zionist Captivity
By Adrian Krieg
© 2004 A. H. Krieg
2-2-4
All other considerations aside, The New Zionist Captivity of America is now in full bloom. Any thought that our domestic or foreign policy is made in favor of or on behalf of America and Americans must be dreaming. The Diaspora (1), which was before the inquisition centered in Spain, moved to Amsterdam Holland at the height of the inquisition, and then to London, and from there to NYC. Jewish communities are ruled over by an amalgamation of Rabbinical (2) tyrants, and are called Kahal's (3) NYC is the Grand Kahal of the Diaspora of the world. Note that the grand Kahal is always located in the major trading power of the world. As Herzel (4) so aptly put it "we thrive on the terrible power of the purse". So much for Zionist nationalism and allegiance to the nation in which they reside, Zionists have allegiance only to the Jewish community. The Talmud is quite clear in allowing Jews to lie, cheat or steal from any non-Jewish entity. In fact dispensation is given for even the vilest acts perpetrated against any none Jew. Verification of this is readily available through an examination of major spies against America, a great preponderance of whom from Pollard to the Rosenberg's have all been Zionists. All this is confirmed in the writings of the Talmud, for any who are able to obtain a translation. Zionists believe that the first five books of the Bible the Torah to be simply a history of the Jewish peoples and outside of that of little religious or social import.
In the lengthy tortured process to take over American foreign policy the Zionists became the captors of the CFR (5) which they began to dominate during the FDR administration. Since that time all American foreign policy emanates from 68th St. in NYC and the CFR. If in fact you want to predict American policy all you need to do is to read Foreign Affairs (6) four times a year and you will become an accurate predictor of our foreign policy. It must be made clear that any organization can be run and managed while holding a minority stake in its overall membership. It is position within the organization that determines its leadership and direction. Just because Zionists do not represent the majority membership of the CFR, Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberger group, does not mean they do not control the venue. We know this from the fact that the majority of multi-national corporations are run by individuals who at best control eight to ten percent of the stock Furthermore for members of the military seeking rapid advancement, membership in the CFR is almost a necessity. Dwight Eisenhower, Alexander Hague, and numerous generals have rapidly risen from colonel to four star general through their membership and acquiescence to CFR dictums.
In its entirety at:
http://www.rense.com/general48/captiv.htm
I am, In Him,
Manuel |
| BatKol |
Posted - 11 Feb 2004 : 03:54:51
Sorry Robert-James I cannot receive the vicarious NICEAN KATTI version of the Son. I am truly sorry that you don't have the eyes to see Me as I Am. There is harmony between the NT and the Tanakh when the allegorcal death, burial, resurrection is understood in Melchezidek context. I was hoping that my sharing all of this would be more in the Spirit of Paul's efforts in Romans 1:11 but you received "Me" not.
Yahushua was first among many who have Realized the non-identified state of Melchezidek and Now, having for mySelf finally understood the implications of "this", I can tell you that I only reject the CATHO=NICEAN version of the SON, not the True Son which never died and cannot die..
Now "I Am" He (mystery paradox: I always "was" and Eternally shall be).
|
| Robert-James |
Posted - 10 Feb 2004 : 21:42:10
1 John 2:22. {KJV} who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is anti-christ that denieth the Father and the Son.
{American} he is a liar that denys that Yahushuah is Yahuweh's Firstborn Son, Messiah of Israel, and the liar is of his father, the devil. For the Father was in the Son, reconciling the Children unto Himself, through the sacrifice of Life through the shed blood.
Yahushuah became The Melchisedec High Priest, after His death, burial, and resurrection.
Revelations 1:5...and from Yahushuah Messiah, the Faithful witness, the first 'begotten' of the dead, and the Chief of the kings of the earth. Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.
{personal to BatKol} John 1:11...He came unto his own, and his own received him not. |
| Manuel |
Posted - 09 Feb 2004 : 21:49:37
Greetings In His name Yahashua, The Messiah,
From what I know and understand... the moon is a dead compacted dust ball, showing me the reflection of the dead in sins, all bundled-up and cudled protecting themselves of the destruction it has caused upon itself, by cunning others to believe. Why people continue to concentrate on "flying/focusing" on the moon (a dead ball), to me is as worshiping the horned-owl.
In Him, I am,
Manuel |
| BatKol |
Posted - 09 Feb 2004 : 20:50:12
Robert-James I absolutely reject and refuse the NICEAN version of the JESUS FICTION that the ROMAN KATTI-CHURCH demanded allegence to (or suffer the sword). What I do welcome with open arms is the allegorical Christ model which existed with my Aryan forefathers, hundreds upon hundreds of years before Yahushua came. This model has been around since before 'the foundations of the world'.. the same illusionary world (maya) as taught by Yahushua, Paul, and the Aryan Brahmins before them.
This gift of salvation is the same gift of salvation spoken of by the Brahmins, i.e Realization and non-identification (Melchezidek)with the flesh/blood realm (maya, world). You can't earn this. "It" chooses you as an act of Grace... This process is happening 'to me' Now and has been happening for quite sometime now. Christ, the Annointing, is the process to this Melchezidek State. I never understood this until I learned about why John the Baptists did what he did, who were the Magi who came to visit baby Yahushua. I never understood this until I found out what the 'court of the gentiles' was in the area of the Temple where Yahushua over turned the tables of the money changers. The 'court of the gentiles' is not included in the Torah design. Find out why the House of David had to share the first Temple with those original inhabitants that could not be driven out and you will see the pattern that brought me to my current juncture. This is, conceptually, the last stop before all concepts (types and shadows) end and all that is left is no-thing (and even NO-THING).
You want my testimony? I Am that which was never born and that which will never die. I Am not the flesh and blood that cannot ever Please YHWH, nor inherit the Kingdom which is neither here nor there.
What you are dealing with here in maya/world is the after-image, a danced, bit-playing puppet named "Steve" in YHWH's Script played out here in this illusionary world of constant change. The Annointing has rent the 300 millisecond veil that stands between the illusionary after-image of the earthly REALM and Melechezidek Now (Eternal without time/space).
Want to see the after-image? Spin your cigarette around in a circle. See the blurred image of lighted tip that gives the illusion of perfect, intact circle? WE, the flesh and blood men are THERE. There is your snake trail.. YHWH is the Light, all else is the after-image. The Annointing stands in the 300 ms gap but don't ask me to build 'my house' on a bridge. The map is not the territory. The menue is not the meal.
PS - Speaking of numerics: How do you like this testimony being the 111 post from BatKol... signs, signs, everywhere the signs! 
|
| Robert-James |
Posted - 09 Feb 2004 : 19:11:32
Greetings Manuel, yes, even today the wheat is being gathered and the tares are boasting oh so wonderfully.
BatKol, is Yahushuah your messiah? Do you accept the free gift of your salvation, cleansing from the sin nature, by the shed blood of the Lamb?
The snake always leaves a trail.
BATKOL you are being visited...do you humble yourself before Yahushuah messiah?
We all anticipate your testimony. |
| BatKol |
Posted - 09 Feb 2004 : 17:01:57
Marty asks: Batkol: What specifically are you referring to that "Paul does say concerning the Torah"?
What specifically are you saying "we can't deny"?
BatKol: That Paul is dismayed that the Galatians, who were of the uncircumcision (not under Torah), would want to be bound over to the
Torah like those who were preaching the "message of the circumcision".
As I posted earlier which you might have missed:
"Paul is basically addressing the Galatians as recipients of the Good News of the uncircumcision and is dismayed at them for wanting to adopt Torah proclaiming, "so thoughtless are ye! having begun in the Spirit, now in the flesh do ye end?" as well as "lo, I Paul do say to you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing; and I testify again to every man circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. (snip)...". These are just a few verses.. The whole
centerpiece of the letter to Galatians is Paul's dismay at the Galatians for thinking they need to be bound to the Law. Why? Because the Galatians were those of "the uncircumsized". Paul says this. So let me change my language to "seems like Paul is speaking against Torah" to "Paul is telling the Galatians that they don't need to be bound to Torah because he is identifying them as "those of the uncircumcison"...
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
Perhaps "seems to be" is a key phrase in the statement above. Please remember what Peter said about Paul's writings in 2 Peter 3:15b-16.
BatKol: Again, I would now strike that "seems to be" as to "is telling them". How can you read Galations from first to last chaptera nd not get that Paul is telling them there is no need to be bound to Torah? That is clear. Why? Because the Galations considered gentiles (of the uncircumcision".. I mean Paul says this through out,no? Does it stand to reason, that Peter, who was of the camp to preach the "Gospel of the circumcision", knew that Paul's words could be twisted if one did not know who Paul was addressing? To me it seems obvious.
Conerstone Foundation said:
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
Please remember what Peter said about Paul's writings in 2 Peter 3:15b-16.
BatKol: Yes, keep this in mind as well. Keep in mind that Paul is clearly speaking to the "uncircumcision" NOT those of the circumcision. IF one is not watching who Paul is talking to, one could get confused as to which camp the people belong to. Paul is everything to everyone so this is very important. The Galations are being talked to, not as lost Israelites (Else he would be preaching Torah), but as Gentiles. Of course, Paul would not be advising Israelites not to be bound to Torah. Only a Gentile who has not, nor has need to, be bound to Torah. The Torah was not given to them only to Israel and Yahudah (the circumcision).
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
Which Law was Paul speaking of in Galations?
BatKol: The same Law that "those of the circumcision" followed since that is what the Galatians were looking into. I seriously doubt that
Paul was speaking of only the circumcision part of the Torah since the Torah is a whole covenant and must be followed as a whole. Look into what Law was followed by those of "the circumcision" and you will find out what Law Paul is advising against concerning the Gauls. NOTE: I am not saying Paul is speaking against Torah, only that it is not for "the uncircumcision".
In a nutshell, it is very important to know who Paul is talking to to understand why he says what he says about the Torah. I think this is what Peter is saying. Context, context, context....To his own, he up holds the Torah because he is talking to Israelites/Yahudeans. Torah is manditory to the "circumcision". To Gauls, gentiles and heathen (all of the uncircumcision) he says why bind to Torah when you have Christ.
I would be more specific on this post but I am using a computer that is not funcioning properly and what normally takes me three minutes to type now takes 20 mins.
I look forward to your response. |
| Manuel |
Posted - 08 Feb 2004 : 19:23:49
Greetings on this day, In His name Yahushua, the Messiah,
Messiah reminded us that he was not here to abolish the law, but to fulfil, and only by exceeding the rightousness of the scribes and pharisees would we enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
What say you? Is not this His Word coming to Life, whereby the weeds are being noticed among the wheat, now that the age of awakening is uprooting, and His Light is revealing the hands on which the blood of the prophets blood are on?
In Him, I am,
Manuel |
| Robert-James |
Posted - 08 Feb 2004 : 16:28:47
Paul admitted his job description was to preach to the "heathen". Which word in greek is ethnos...which in American-English is ethnic...which means tribe, nation. Oxfords defines ethnic as: having a common national or cultural tradition. Acts 24:17, {Paul speaking} now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation. Nation here is the greek word; ethnos. The KJV was politically correct for their day. THEY only wanted THEIR KING to sit on the Throne. Sorry translators, this is a new Day. We are becoming a nation of king-priests. Truth is the hardest substance in the universe. Many a pirate ship has been smashed when they ran into the Rock of Ages.
Deuterony 32:8-12.
Yahushuah also admitted that He was called to seek and save the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Scattered among the nations. Paul was a prisoner of messiah Yahushuah...and The Message. The book of hebrews is addressed to whom??? Jamess' epistle also.
Psalm 83 lists 10 nations that try to cut off Israel from being a nation. Psalm 2 says it all. Those who hate the Son, hate the Father also.
Precious is the Blood of the Lamb. Precious also in the sight of YHWH is the blood of His saints.
What saith the talmud about the blood of Yahushuah? |
| Cornerstone Foundation |
Posted - 08 Feb 2004 : 15:17:03
Cornerstone Foundation Post Number 40
quote:
Originally posted by BatKol
Thank you Walter and Marty for some great comments. Walter it is true what Paul does say what he says concerning the Torah. This we can't deny.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
Batkol: What specifically are you referring to that "Paul does say concerning the Torah"?
What specifically are you saying "we can't deny"?
quote:
Batkol wrote: Paul, speaking often to those of the uncircumcision, almost seems to be preaching against the Torah in a sense.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
Perhaps "seems to be" is a key phrase in the statement above. Please remember what Peter said about Paul's writings in 2 Peter 3:15b-16.
Many people who study the New Writings know John 3:16 very well. We think perhaps it would be beneficial if they knew 2 Peter 3:16 just as well.
We certainly don't mean by stating this that you are unlearned and unstable. Our point here is that Peter's caveat concerning Paul's writings is important for us all to keep in mind as we search for the truth by "rightly dividing the word of truth" as Paul so appropriately encouraged Timothy in 2 Timothy 3:15.
Having said that, we will suggest that you do something that has been helpful to us and that is: to ask the question, "Which Law?", every time Paul uses the word "Law" in his writings.
It seems perhaps that you are assuming that when Paul uses the word "law" in addressing the Galatians that he is in all cases referring to the Mosaic Law Covenant given at Mount Sinai.
We respectfully disagree with that assumption for several reasons.
We think that it is important to know that just as the word "bill" has several meanings so also the word "law" has several meanings.
1. You may know a man whose name is "Bill"
2. The electric company may send you a "bill" each month.
3. A "bill" is part of the anatomy of a duck.
4. A baseball cap has a "bill".
5. The legislature votes on a document called a "bill".
When Paul uses the word "law" in his letters we believe it is necessary to see which of the following definitions of "law" he is referring to each time he uses the term:
1. Yahweh's Law, Statute and Judgements which existed long before the time of Moses. This "Law" was evident in the Code of Hammarabbi (sp?). It existed at the time of Noah, it existed at the time of Abraham, and was codified as a part(meaning there were "additions" to it) of the Covenant with Moses at Mount Sinai but is not to be considered as being one and the same with "that law". {See Genesis 26:5 and other references).
2. A second definition of "law" is the covenant Yahweh made with Moses and Israyl at Mount Horeb in the Wilderness of Sinai in the third month after the exodus from Egypt. (please see Exodus 19:5-6 and the related portions of Scripture that follow). This definition number 2 of the word "law" includes but is not limited to the well know "Ten Commandments".
3. The third definition of "law" is the "additional" law covenant that Yahweh made with Moses and Israyl in the land of Moab forty years after the covenant referred to in definition 2 above. Information concerning "this law" begins in Dueteronomy 6:1 and continues through Dueteronomy 29:1. Dueteronomy 29:1 makes that point very clear as it states "These are the terms of the covenant Yahweh commanded Moses to make with the children of Israyl in the land of Moab 'in addition' to the covenant He had made with them at Horeb (Sinai)."
4. The forth definition of "law" is the law of the Levitical Priesthood.
5. The fifth definition of "law" is the law of the Aaronic Priesthood which has specific distinctions from the Levitical Priesthood law.
6. The sixth definition of "law" is the law of sin and death.
We don't have all of this totally sorted out in regards to which "law" Paul is referring to in each instance he uses the term "law" in his letter to the Galatians. We have studied this enough to know that there is something very significant here. Perhaps you can help us come to a fuller understanding.
Perhaps an amplified rendering of Galatians 3:17-19 would be:
"Now I, Paul, say this to you uncircumcised literal flesh and blood decendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israyl who are now called Galatian Israylites: The Law of the Aaronic Priesthood, which came into existence 430 years after the Abrahamic "Law" Covenant (definition #1) was already ratified by Yahweh-does not do away with, nor abolish the unconditional promise that Yahweh made to your literal flesh and blood ancestor Abraham.
For if the inheritance is outside the Abrahamic "Law" covenant (definition #1), then it is no longer from the promise Yahweh made to your father Abraham when he made that unconditional Abrahamic "Law" Covenant with Abraham.
What then was the purpose of The "Law" of the Aaronic Priesthood "Law"? It "was added" 430 years after the Abrahamic "Law" Covenant for forgiveness of transgressions, until the Seed would come to Whom it had been promised, ordained by angels through the hand of a mediator"
Now with all that in mind, please read Galatians 4:21-31 where it becomes very clear that at least in this portion of the letter Paul is addressing literal flesh and blood Galatian Israylite descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob/Israyl.
Marty
|
| BatKol |
Posted - 08 Feb 2004 : 12:07:13
Robert-James, I agree with the scripture you post even though I might not agree with how you are fitting it into Galatians.
The scripture you posted is for House of Yahudah and even unto the House of Israel..
NOT to non-Israelites (those of the uncircumcision)..
Concerning Israelites, yes the Torah is manditory. One of the main points in Scripture is the return of the Israelites to Torah. The messianic prophecies such as the re-uniting of the Two Houses, the weapons into plowshares, etc. will not happen with out this "Lost Israel" return to Torah. Call it a second coming or a first coming, either way there is no "One World Israelite Government" until the Houses (Two sticks) are brought back together.
Lost Israel must come back to Torah that is clear.
Now, if you believe that Paul really was a master student of Torah and the rest of Tanakh as he claims, you must seriously ask yourself why he would be swaying the Galatians from taking the Torah oath and thus binding them to such.
Paul tells you why: Because he was speaking, especially here in Galatians, to non-Israelites (those of the uncircumcision).
If they were of the lost Tribes of Israel, don't you think Paul (Torah scholar bar none) would have said all the same great things about the Christ experience along with taking the oath of Torah?? He clearly instructs them not to become bound to the Torah and to reject any other Gospel than the one, he Paul, was brining them (i.e. - the Gospel of the uncircumcision, (the gospel that was appointed to him and approved by the Jerusalem Temple headed by James).
Why? Obviously because the Galations were not "those of the circumcision". |
| Robert-James |
Posted - 08 Feb 2004 : 11:02:21
Greetings, we have heard from Paul, ok? Ezekiel 44:5 and YHWH said unto me, Son of man, mark well, and behold with thine "eyes", and hear with thine "ears" all that I say unto thee concerning all the ordinances of the house of YHWH, and all the laws thereof, and mark well the entering in of the house, with every going forth of the sanctuary.
And thou shall say to the rebellious, even to the house of Israel, Thus saith YHWH, oh ye house of Israel, let it suffice you of all your abominations, in that ye have brought {into My sanctuary} STRANGERS, uncircumcised in the heart and uncircumcised in the flesh, to be in My sanctuary, to pollute it, {even} My house, when ye offer My Bread, the fat and the blood, and they have broken My covenant because of all your abominations.
And ye have not kept the charge of My set-apart things, but YOU have set keepers of My charge in My sanctuary for YOURSELVES. "Thus saith YHWH"...no stranger, uncircumcised in the heart...nor uncircumcised in the flesh, shall enter into My sanctuary, of any stranger that is among the Children of Israel.
Suffice to say, the Children are within the same Law as the strangers who want to enter the House.
After 1900 + years, is it possible we can get more revelation that even Paul? Please think yes.
Only an unregenerate dead lettered soul, following the dead letter, would assume the simple act of a cutting of extra skin would put him in the presence of YHWH. {This is what Paul was trying to overcome in the minds of the people}.
Nevertheless, Ezekiel's writings are scripture. Circumcision is much older that Abraham.
For some reason Roman christianity has always taught that since Jesus kept the Law, WE don't have too.
A righteous man falleth 7 times...and gets up again. |
| BatKol |
Posted - 08 Feb 2004 : 10:11:00
Thank you Walter and Marty for some great comments. Walter it is true what Paul does say what he says concerning the Torah. This we can't deny. I have always been under the mindset that one must look who Paul is talking to in these contexts. Yes, James does say, "to the Israelites scattered abroad" but, it seems, that his message was to those of the "circumcision" (i.e. - Israelites who need to come back under Torah, as per Hosea, etc). Paul, speaking often to those of the uncircumcision, almost seems to be preaching agaisnt the Torah in a sense. The reason, I think, for this is because these people did not take an oath to Torah, were not born into Torah, and hence were not Israelites in the sense of Torah. Paul, through sheparding them into the Christ awakening, was able to get them to the place that the Torah aims for through acts of the flesh. Directly. Twinkling of an eye type stuff. I can see why Paul would be upset with these people wanting to get under Torah having achieved already what the Torah's end goal is... With the Aryan Brahmins there is a same understanding. The slow methodical way is called "the Way of the snail" while there is a direct Way called, "the Way of the bird" which is like a bird effortlessly flying from one branch (current state) to another branch (non-dual State of Echad). It seems like Paul was teaching in this style.... Now, I am not saying that my understanding is correct, but, to me, this 'concept' that Paul was speaking mostly to those of the "uncircumcision" when speaking of the bondage of Torah. For these people, since they were not Israelites according to Torah, it would be pointless to make an oath to Torah.
Now to the Israelites scattered abroad, the "circumcision" I could see why James and company would be preaching Torah, circumcision, etc to them. This fulfills prophecy. This is the only way I see how to make the two views harmonize. Here is a link to the statue of "the dying gaul" 250 BCE
http://www.eekman.com/virtual_gallery/sculptures/gaul.shtml
This statue is uncircumsized but these pictures do not show this angle. If this is not archetypical white man... I don't know what is.
|
| Walter |
Posted - 08 Feb 2004 : 05:37:13
quote:
Originally posted by Cornerstone Foundation
...what does the phrase you have "borrowed" above have to do with the subject being discussed...specifically.
I was attempting to speak to BakTol's assertion that Paul would teach the Galatians the Torah if they were Israel. I am merely saying that just because there is no direct statement in our Bibles that Paul did so, does not mean he didn't. He could have taught them that and many other things while he was with them and in other letters not canonized in the Bible. Just because things are not recorded in the Bible does not necessarily mean those things did not happen. And this sub-thread had nothing to do with the topic. |
|
|
