Sufficient Self's Bible Study Group

[MarylandFutureFarmGuy]

If I may, playfully banter with you, Wannabefree....so here it goes. Also let it be known that I don't know a single thing about the new testament (and even your old testament is a bit different from what I am used to....)

So, first there is the law, and then, the law is that the law gives a person knowledge of the sins that he did not know of before? In some cases that is true, but many of the laws are affirmative...for example: To lend to a poor person, that a man shall fulfill whatever he has uttered, to sound the Ram's horn in a rabbinical year....there are many more affirmative laws. how is there a sin associated with not blowing into a Ram's horn?

This is a great resource for the 613 commandments, and it clearly states whether they are affirmative or negative:http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

While I haven't quite analyzed the Torah in great detail, I find that the general Jewish attitude is that you do what you can. My rabbi has never mentioned any bad consequences for not fulfilling laws, he has simply said that you will be closer to god, more fulfilled, etc if you do. Concepts of Heaven/Hell aren't divulged into too deeply, and from what I know, the Jewish Perspective of a "hell" is vastly different from the Christian one.

 

[MarylandFutureFarmGuy]

I have a question for all you Christians out there (as I am Jewish, and this has been bugging me).


Everything in the Tanakh (You know it as the Old testament) that comes from God is cumulative. First, there are the Seven Noahide Laws. Then Comes the Ten Commandments, and the rest of the mitzvot (laws), 613 to be exact, you probably recognize them as Keeping Kosher and against incest, etc... However, what I don't understand, is why there would be a presence of laws, and then some understanding that "because Jesus died for your sins, you no longer have to follow them." They are religiously established rules and guidelines. Why would they be void? And if they are void, then why is it still of relevance to you?


And don't think I suddenly want everyone in the world to refrain from eating pork. As far as I am concerned, as long as you show a general good spirit, and do not steal (An item, a life, an amount of money), then you are a good person.


Hopefully this post hasn't been to far in the Moderator's Gray Area.....

As best as I can answer this is, read the Book of Acts, chapter 10, where Peter was on the roof and became hungry. All manner of animal was brought to him and the Lord told him to get up, kill, and eat. When Peter said he'd never eaten an unclean animal, God replied with do not call that which I've made clean unclean.

Well Quail, that sure as heck conflicts with Lev 11:4!


This is copied from an online King James Bible:
Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.


May I mention the words unclean


There are many mistranslations of both testaments, I'm sure this is one of them

 

[Wannabefree]

If I may, playfully banter with you, Wannabefree....so here it goes. Also let it be known that I don't know a single thing about the new testament (and even your old testament is a bit different from what I am used to....)

So, first there is the law, and then, the law is that the law gives a person knowledge of the sins that he did not know of before? In some cases that is true, but many of the laws are affirmative...for example: To lend to a poor person, that a man shall fulfill whatever he has uttered, to sound the Ram's horn in a rabbinical year....there are many more affirmative laws. how is there a sin associated with not blowing into a Ram's horn?

This is a great resource for the 613 commandments, and it clearly states whether they are affirmative or negative:http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

While I haven't quite analyzed the Torah in great detail, I find that the general Jewish attitude is that you do what you can. My rabbi has never mentioned any bad consequences for not fulfilling laws, he has simply said that you will be closer to god, more fulfilled, etc if you do. Concepts of Heaven/Hell aren't divulged into too deeply, and from what I know, the Jewish Perspective of a "hell" is vastly different from the Christian one.

Forgive me, I am not too familiar with your Torah either. Therefore I can only tell you what my bible states on these matters.

The law outlines sin, yes. Similar to a child taking something that doesn't belong to them, or backtalking their parents, until they get reprimanded, they don't realize they are doing something bad. The law is our reprimand. Abraham was before the law, so God "accounted it to him for righteousness" things that he did, in our bible. Since the law had not been given yet, Abraham had no way of knowing whether he was doing "right" or "wrong" but he walked with God.

613 commandments is a new one to me. We have ten, and the greatest is "love thy neighbor as thyself."

The general Christian attitude is do the best you can as well. I have studied the bible deeply, and do so daily...well most of the time

I also have no knowledge of the Jewish perspective of "hell," so, I'd have to do a little research to be able to comment on things I do not know about. I do love to study, so I may be able to come up with a comparison and possibly an explanation of our beliefs as opposed to yours after some research if you're just curious about the difference. I know why I believe the things I do, but I can't really speak for others.

 

[Quail_Antwerp]

I have a question for all you Christians out there (as I am Jewish, and this has been bugging me).


Everything in the Tanakh (You know it as the Old testament) that comes from God is cumulative. First, there are the Seven Noahide Laws. Then Comes the Ten Commandments, and the rest of the mitzvot (laws), 613 to be exact, you probably recognize them as Keeping Kosher and against incest, etc... However, what I don't understand, is why there would be a presence of laws, and then some understanding that "because Jesus died for your sins, you no longer have to follow them." They are religiously established rules and guidelines. Why would they be void? And if they are void, then why is it still of relevance to you?


And don't think I suddenly want everyone in the world to refrain from eating pork. As far as I am concerned, as long as you show a general good spirit, and do not steal (An item, a life, an amount of money), then you are a good person.


Hopefully this post hasn't been to far in the Moderator's Gray Area.....

As best as I can answer this is, read the Book of Acts, chapter 10, where Peter was on the roof and became hungry. All manner of animal was brought to him and the Lord told him to get up, kill, and eat. When Peter said he'd never eaten an unclean animal, God replied with do not call that which I've made clean unclean.

Well Quail, that sure as heck conflicts with Lev 11:4!


This is copied from an online King James Bible:
Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.


May I mention the words unclean


There are many mistranslations of both testaments, I'm sure this is one of them

I don't believe it conflicts, because when Peter was told to eat of it, it was after they crucified Christ. Christ's death changed the law, because his Ultimate sacrifice set us free from sin (being unclean).

Also, the Old Testament law pertained to the Jews, not the Gentiles. Not that the Gentiles needed to be running around partaking in immoral things, but the laws God set were for His People. Once Christ died, it changed the laws. Even Gentiles could now be forgiven and enter Heaven.

 

[Wannabefree]

If I may interject here...yes the law applies differently to the Jews than it does to the Gentiles according to our bible.

 

[Quail_Antwerp]

If I may interject here...yes the law applies differently to the Jews than it does to the Gentiles according to our bible.

Thank you, Sis!

 

[Denim Deb]

Not sure what you consider a mistranslation, could you please explain more?

God gave the law, but then man added to it. They added all kinds of things to explain it, and took away from the intent. They put man's traditions in place of the law. In Matthew 15:1-9, the scribes and Pharisees want to know why His disciples didn't follow the traditions of the elders. Jesus' response was why do you sin by your traditions. The last verse pretty much sums it up. But in vain they do worship Me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

As for the law and the Christian, Christ said in Matthew 5:17 that He didn't come to destroy the law nor the prophets, but to fulfill. Galatians 3:24 says that the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

There's so much I could write to explain it, but I'm tired and it probably wouldn't come out right. The book of Galatians is a good book to read. It explains the reason for the law, and the relationship between that, Christ's death on the cross, and the Christian.

 

[Wannabefree]

I *think* what he means by mistranslation is the fact that there are many Jewish words that don't translate well into English. There is the same issue in the New Testament with the Greek to English translations. I think he believes that it is a simple error in translation which varies the meaning of the original texts when translated into our language. I disagree with that conclusion, but it is a viable arguement.

 

[MarylandFutureFarmGuy]

"Also, the Old Testament law pertained to the Jews, not the Gentiles. Not that the Gentiles needed to be running around partaking in immoral things, but the laws God set were for His People. Once Christ died, it changed the laws. Even Gentiles could now be forgiven and enter Heaven."

I'm going to sort of subdivide what you said there, because you sort of split the laws applying to groups.

You are 100 percent right that the Old testament only pertains to Jews, as it still does today. That is why Jewish Conversion is virtually non-existent.


however, I assumed by the fact Christianity takes source from the Old Testament, that it would have been something Christians would have followed, if not for the part that says that you no longer have to follow these laws....

Also, according to Judaism at least, Gentiles could always enter heaven. The chosen people doesn't necessarily mean superiority, it is simply meant to say followers of God's Law's. The Noahide Laws, which were given after the Great Flood, are the Guideline for EVERY human being, Gentile, or Jew, as everyone is a descendant of Noah. These are the law's for everyone. However, pretty much all the laws after only applied to the jews.


I came up with the own answer to my question I think, and it is right under my nose:


So Christians believe Jesus was the Messiah, so therefore, they believe the Messianic age has come, so all Old School Rules are out of date. Okay, I could see how one could make sense of that


Also, the 613 commandments are different from the 10 commandments you know. the 10 are the basics. the 613 are interwoven into the Torah, and include all the things you probably associate the Jewish Religion with, Wannabefree.


somehow I feel as if I am the only one who veered this thread off of Chrisitanity...

 

[Wannabefree]

Judaism....Christianity...not too far from each other really There are other Jewish folks who frequent this thread as well. No worries, you're in good company I don't believe the New Testamnet says we do not have to follow the laws. We do have to follow them, but Christ took the place of some of them.

Now I have a question for you if you don't mind..Why do Jews no longer do animal sacrifice?