-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Acts 15/Galatians 2 To C or not to C
- Thread starter Verifyveritas76
- Start date
Just wanted to say good on you brother for your willingness to come to new understanding, publicly confess where you believe you have been in error, and stick by it even when it will have real-world consequences.
And talmudic teachings are a serious danger creeping through both the church and secular culture. For an extreme example, where does the idea that an unborn baby is not yet human and can be murdered with impunity come from? Talmud. It's an unscientific but rather religious distinction between human life that has rights and supposed non-humans with no rights. But this is far more wide-ranging than that. The Jewish influence in the Hebrew Roots movement is increasingly concerning. It's difficult to see where the lines lie sometimes, or whether something is important or not. But this is a serious issue and will only become more pressing. We must be willing to seek understanding, and to have the courage to act. So keep standing on the Word brother and be suspicious of everything that feels like a counterfeit - it may be more dangerous than it initially appears.
Not it
You are missing the bigger point. God can and did give Torah that negated previous Torah for those people. I didnt write it but am definitely not gonna try to explain it away.
Are you aware of any Sabbath observance before this time? I’m referring to a specific 7th day set aside for Rest and worship.
I’m not sure what you are trying to say.
Lack of sleep, I didn't realize I enlarged that or misspelled Sinai lol. So I'm going to do an edit there. Are you asking for proof that Shabbat was followed by Gods command before Sinai like I pointed out in Exodus 16:22-30? or Asking for an additional example of the instruction to keep Shabbat being given as instruction before Sinai? One example of God speaking and giving instruction before Sinai isn't good enough? Not sure I can give a better one. lol
Last edited:
Was Torah in the Garden of Eden and if so, to what degree?
Recently, @Verifyveritas76 issued a mild challenge stating,
I have defended this position before and believe it is a valid question that deserves a solid answer. IF we have an unchanging God AND His Word reveals His character, THEN we should see evidences of consistency from Creation until now that prove His unchanging character.
Before diving in, it is important to identify a 'lens' that most in Christendom wear, so that it not affect our understanding. We have long been taught that God doesn't change and that He is consistent, but then we use some form of dispensational thinking to parse Him into ages and categories that justify abolishing or nullifying His commands in one time period or another. The place that I have come to and hope to demonstrate is that His commands, because they demonstrate His character, cannot change and actually existed before Creation and will exist until the New Heaven and New Earth. A final preemptive note, just because He doesn't tell us something until Moses, doesn't mean it didn't exist before. The following evidences will demonstrate that details of the "Mosaic Torah" existed well before Moses was born.
Genesis 4:3-5 says,
We must ask, how did Abel know to bring firstlings and fat portions? That is not defined until Moses. Notice that Abel also brought indicating that he brought the requisite offerings 'from the ground' as well... How did he know? Was he just lucky? Notice as well that the Lord 'had regard', or 'smiled on' Abel's offering, but not on Cain's. Did God choose arbitrarily or was He just in that they knew what the correct offering was, but Cain chose not to offer?
Genesis 4:6-7 says,
"If you do well..." Where is the definition for 'do well?' Is God just throwing a blank check at Cain to define 'do well,' or has Elohim already defined it? If God has not defined it, is He just for judging Cain in such a difficult matter to discern: 'firstlings and fat portions' v. 'fruit of the ground?' The truth is, 'sin' is defined as 'lawlessness' or 'breaking the law.' (1 Jn 3:4) Hebraically,'lawlessness is 'torahlessness.' Simply, for God to even invoke 'sin' it has to have been a defined term which was defined by 'law.' (The term law is 'Torah', more correctly translated as 'instructions.')
But, there is more, Genesis 4:8-15 tell us that Cain killed Abel and then God cursed Cain. Cain expresses concern that anyone who found him would 'kill him.' Why? Because he knew the penalty for murder was death. Anyone who found him would be justified in putting him to death!
So, to recap from this one little passage, Cain and Abel knew the following from what is later recorded at Mt. Sinai. Two types of sacrifices, first fruits, fat portions, definition of sin, murder and the just penalty. None of those are recorded as having been instructed prior to Mt. Sinai and the 'Torah of Moses,' yet they clearly knew and understood.
Genesis has a number of other proofs that we need to ask similar questions about. For brevity's sake, I'll simply hit highlights:
The following is taken from an article I wrote six years ago.
So, easily we can see that throughout Genesis, there is a consistent understanding and application of God's Instructions. I maintain that Torah existed from the Garden of Eden.
But, here is a bigger question: Did Torah exist before the foundations of the world? And, @Verifyveritas76 , that article also addresses your Melchizedek v. Levitical Priesthood quandary....
Blessings and I hope this explains what I understand to be truth. Abba is consistent and has revealed himself and His instructions from the very beginning. We may not see them recorded until some point in the stream of time (Mt. Sinai) but that in no way means He was adding to or making things up as He went. It was all there from the beginning and all remains to this day. We may not be able to be fully obedient because some requirements do not currently exist (Temple, priesthood, etc) but that does not mean they are 'done away with. It simply means those aspects of the Torah are suspended until He makes a way.
Recently, @Verifyveritas76 issued a mild challenge stating,
I have defended this position before and believe it is a valid question that deserves a solid answer. IF we have an unchanging God AND His Word reveals His character, THEN we should see evidences of consistency from Creation until now that prove His unchanging character.
Before diving in, it is important to identify a 'lens' that most in Christendom wear, so that it not affect our understanding. We have long been taught that God doesn't change and that He is consistent, but then we use some form of dispensational thinking to parse Him into ages and categories that justify abolishing or nullifying His commands in one time period or another. The place that I have come to and hope to demonstrate is that His commands, because they demonstrate His character, cannot change and actually existed before Creation and will exist until the New Heaven and New Earth. A final preemptive note, just because He doesn't tell us something until Moses, doesn't mean it didn't exist before. The following evidences will demonstrate that details of the "Mosaic Torah" existed well before Moses was born.
Genesis 4:3-5 says,
We must ask, how did Abel know to bring firstlings and fat portions? That is not defined until Moses. Notice that Abel also brought indicating that he brought the requisite offerings 'from the ground' as well... How did he know? Was he just lucky? Notice as well that the Lord 'had regard', or 'smiled on' Abel's offering, but not on Cain's. Did God choose arbitrarily or was He just in that they knew what the correct offering was, but Cain chose not to offer?
Genesis 4:6-7 says,
"If you do well..." Where is the definition for 'do well?' Is God just throwing a blank check at Cain to define 'do well,' or has Elohim already defined it? If God has not defined it, is He just for judging Cain in such a difficult matter to discern: 'firstlings and fat portions' v. 'fruit of the ground?' The truth is, 'sin' is defined as 'lawlessness' or 'breaking the law.' (1 Jn 3:4) Hebraically,'lawlessness is 'torahlessness.' Simply, for God to even invoke 'sin' it has to have been a defined term which was defined by 'law.' (The term law is 'Torah', more correctly translated as 'instructions.')
But, there is more, Genesis 4:8-15 tell us that Cain killed Abel and then God cursed Cain. Cain expresses concern that anyone who found him would 'kill him.' Why? Because he knew the penalty for murder was death. Anyone who found him would be justified in putting him to death!
So, to recap from this one little passage, Cain and Abel knew the following from what is later recorded at Mt. Sinai. Two types of sacrifices, first fruits, fat portions, definition of sin, murder and the just penalty. None of those are recorded as having been instructed prior to Mt. Sinai and the 'Torah of Moses,' yet they clearly knew and understood.
Genesis has a number of other proofs that we need to ask similar questions about. For brevity's sake, I'll simply hit highlights:
The following is taken from an article I wrote six years ago.
So, easily we can see that throughout Genesis, there is a consistent understanding and application of God's Instructions. I maintain that Torah existed from the Garden of Eden.
But, here is a bigger question: Did Torah exist before the foundations of the world? And, @Verifyveritas76 , that article also addresses your Melchizedek v. Levitical Priesthood quandary....
Blessings and I hope this explains what I understand to be truth. Abba is consistent and has revealed himself and His instructions from the very beginning. We may not see them recorded until some point in the stream of time (Mt. Sinai) but that in no way means He was adding to or making things up as He went. It was all there from the beginning and all remains to this day. We may not be able to be fully obedient because some requirements do not currently exist (Temple, priesthood, etc) but that does not mean they are 'done away with. It simply means those aspects of the Torah are suspended until He makes a way.
?????? They passed medical Marijuana in Oklahoma. How's your shoulder doing? I think ill pop up for a visit my backs hurting. j/k I don't partake
Please explain. Ill entertain any explanation of anything up to the point where it makes God a liar and or Yeshua a sinner, as long as it comes from a source backed up by scripture and not interpretation.
Last edited:
My shoulders all healed up now, and no I didnt partake!
You’re welcome to visit anytime, of course.As I read the passage in question, (Isaiah 1:10 specifically) The nation as a whole is referred to as Sodom and Gomorrah, though there is a remnant. Verse 10 identifies the instructions to follow as the word of the Lord and exhorts them to hear the law of God (which follows) Verse 11 and following is literally the Torah that this nation is being given in that moment by order of God. These commands are distinctly opposite from the commands given at Sinai, and the process of restoration begins in verse 16-18 which contains the core of righteousness throughout scripture.
Not sure if that explains what I see, but in short, God, using new Torah, commands them to stop following previous Torah. This does not change God, nor his righteousness, nor who he is nor does it make him a liar. Rather, IMO it exposes that the mantra that because God is changeless = He cannot change torah or change his commands is a false equation.
So, the challenge was not to show that there was some kind of law/torah present in the Garden, but to show that the Sinai Torah was present in the Garden.
Firstfruits of either animal or beast is specifically a Melchizedek torah. It existed at least since the Fall, was incorporated into the Sinai Torah (along with the Noahide torah) and was utilized in the early church under a renewed Melchizedek covenant.
As I see it, there are multiple Sinai commands given that had they been in existence at the Fall, virtually none of the patriarchs could have been considered righteous. Specifically marriage laws, but also Sabbaths and festivals, frequencies of sacrifices, and all of the Levitical ordinances. Sacrifices pre Sinai were distinctly burnt offerings offered by the Adown with no one eating of them pre Sinai.
There is also the little issue of God giving them sabbaths in Exodus 16. There is no record of a Sabbath observance in Scripture prior to that in command or action, though the existence of a 7 day cycle was known according to the conversation with Laban and Jacob at his first wedding, and probably a 7 year cycle may have been known but that is purely conjecture with the information we have from Scripture. So without Scriptural evidence to the contrary, this is a momentous change in policy by a changeless God. There is also the small detail of the beginning of the year changing in Exodus 12. Ok, ok! Thats a massive change, and then you have the even more massive change from a Melchizedek to a Levitical priesthood, as if a man could actually be a substitute for Christ. Then the dietary changes was pretty massive, much like the massive change from the Eden Covenant to the Noahide covenant (vegetarian to omnivore)
And through all of those changes, God never changed. Because a changeless God does not equal an inability to change his commands. Rather it proves that he is All powerful and does not answer to any authority higher than himself.
You say slander I look at all the writings of a person as a whole and see the truth, though I did miss speak about the signs remark Ill admit that. I stated a widely stated belief that is well document regardless if you agree with it or not.
You'll find what I did about all through out Clement of Alexandria in the Protrepticus (Exhortation), the Paedagoquos (Tutor), the Stromata (Miscellanies), you can find in the 6th book His universalist doctrine I forgot to mention earlier which says that Christ's promise of salvation is available to all, even those condemned to hell and where he says Adam was not perfect when created.
Photios I of Constantinople writes against Clement's theology in the Bibliotheca, also in Clement of Alexandria on Trial: The Evidence of "Heresy" from Photius' Bibliotheca. by Ashwin-Siejkowski, Piotr (2010).
"The Other Clement of Alexandria: Cosmic Hierarchy and Interiorized Apocalypticism" Bucur, Bogdan G. (2006).
Homer or Moses?: Early Christian Interpretations of the History of Culture. Droge, Arthur J. (1989).
Yeah, nope sorry I don't even have to use apologetics to defend against that it doesn't make sense and anyone readying the scripture can see the man behind the curtain. I was looking forward to bacon wrapped crab and lobster stuffed catfish in a shrimp sauce with a side of calamari, clam hush puppies, oysters on the half shell, and horseradish sauce covered steamed muscles. Still not clean to eat because Torah is Still there.
Last edited:
Question... Exodus 16. Who uses the term Shabbat first? The Lord, or... Moses?
Melchizedek Torah? Where does that term come from? Sounds like a manmade division...
Noahide Torah.... same, same. No such deal...
Melchizedek covenant? Again, you are creating divisions and applying names where Scripture never draws the distinction.
There is one Torah. Period.
You’re gonna have to explain all the righteous men who lived obviously anti Torah lives to prove that one. As well as all of the changes I listed above.
Good luck!
Nope. If Avinu Malkenu says they are righteous, who am I to question him? Just because I don't understand the details or parameters or know their hearts, etc... does not mean He is wrong or unjust.
His Word says,
Ex. 12:49 'One Torah shall be to him who is native born and unto the stranger who sojourns among you.'
Lev. 24:22 'Ye shall have one law (mishpat) as well for the stranger as for one of your own country: I am The Lord your God.'
Num. 15:16-17 'As for the assembly, there shall be one statute for you and for the alien that sojourns, a perpetual statute throughout your generations; as you are , so shall the alien be before the Lord. There is to be one Torah and one ordinance for you and for the alien who sojourns with you.'
Ezekiel 40-48? As well as the fact that the Messiah will rule with Torah and Torah demands certain things including many non-sin offerings. If He doesn't teach and implement Torah, He ain't the Messiah! (Tough pill for Christendom to swallow, but true.) Remember, Yeshua said that not a single letter will pass from the Torah or the prophets until heaven and earth pass away. The prophecies clearly point to future Torah implementation.
Now, to be clear: I believe that it is possible a false temple will be built on the temple mount prior to the real deal being built on the original site in the City of David about 600' south of the current temple mount. What is currently regarded as the temple mount is, imho, the Fort of Antonia that housed 8000 Roman soldiers, etc... Still researching that, but what exists there today does not fit the prophetic picture....
He will be teaching Torah but it will be a completed Torah. A point where it appears you are still looking thru a glass darkly.
And Scripture clearly says at the second coming Of Christ the earth will be melted with a fervent heat. So how can a temple of God be built on something he said wouldn't be there.
Very likely satan will have a third temple built to confuse people. But I can't find an explicit reference stating God will have another temple built on this earth. The new temples referenced in the new testament are all pointing to our bodies being the temple and the old brick and mortar temple having been a shadow of that.
How do you explain all the references of the shadow of the things to come? That means when the complete thing comes the original is no longer of practical value of itself. It is now a shadow and the new thing is now the focus.
Not one jot or tittle shall pass away till heaven and Earth pass away. Yet with Jesus as the complete sacrifice the need for the blood of bulls was put away. That's why I question the validity of the "following the original Torah understanding emphasis".
I sometimes find myself a little at odds with my Hebrew Roots brethren here. Yes God is the same for ever and ever and His Words endure forever but I don't see how we can deny that He rolled out His Revelation in stages. Abraham and Sarah's union would have brought a death penalty after Sinai. Moses gave a substantially different Law right before the Hebrew children entered the Promised Land thab he had at Sinai. And Christ exploded everything and stitched it back together again. Paul and the other Apostles delivered some substantially enlarged doctrines.
All of these things were consistent with God's nature and what came previously, nothing contradicted or clashed but He did not give us everything at once.