Play Station
For God alone my soul waits in silence, from Him comes my salvation. Psalm 62:1 ESV (English text)
Comes – I think it’s important to recognize how the very structure of our language subtly alters how we understand the text. The fact is that Hebrew doesn’t even work like English or any of the Indo-European languages. First, it has no vowels. Secondly, the structure of the Hebrew letters communicates a second level of meaning impossible to translate. Third, the syntax of Hebrew is strikingly different than Indo-European languages.
Mimenoo yeshooati is the Hebrew phrase. It does not contain the verb “to come.” It doesn’t even have a verb. It says, “from him my salvation.” The translators supply the verb. But consider what David is saying in Hebrew. Salvation is not something that arrives from God. Salvation is God. His presence is the demonstration of salvation. Salvation is not something He delivers as if it were separate from Him. To be saved (rescued, delivered) is to be His.
In Greek thought, attributes and qualities are often treated as if they are separate from the object but attached to it. For example, a red car is a car with the separate but attached red color. It would still be a car if I removed the color. Car is the essence. Red is an attribute. But in Hebrew thinking, this car is a red car. If I remove the red, it is no longer this car because this car is red. Red is not a separate attribute. Red is what makes this car what it is.
The same idea applies to God and salvation. Salvation is not something separate from God that He distributes like we distribute money. Salvation is God. If I take away the “attribute” of salvation, I no longer have this God. So God does not provide me with salvation. He participates with me and it is His involvement with me that saves. He is hesed and hesed only applies within the relationship.
David is not asking God to deliver something called “salvation.” He is asking for God. “From him my salvation.” David needs God’s presence. That is David’s rescue. Notice that it does not matter how or why or what is involved in God’s presence. None of that matters. All that matters is God with me!
Oh, yes. By the way, “God with me” is not determined by my earning the right to accompany Him. He provides the invitation and the means. He is the active agent in the arrangement. From Him my salvation. All that is required of me is to wait for Him – and wait is an active verb in Hebrew. Salvation is not a thing nor is it a place. It is a relationship I have as long as He participates with me.
Topical Index: mimenoo yeshooati, salvation, Psalm 62:1
Love is the means and the end.
Love is its own reward.
Love is the means and the end. Love is its own reward. and ~ God is Love! ~
~ Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love ~ (1 John 4:8)
To be saved (rescued, delivered) is to be His.
~ Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it does not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when He shall appear, we shall be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is ~ (1 John 3:2)
Who is this Man?
Whose (very) Name IS “salvation?” or “YHWH saves?”
Who was it that we so cruelly crucified upon the tslav? If the Logos became flesh and lived among us, if this Logos was God as well as Man, the Word of God incarnate, who was it that was pierced by a thorn of crowns and was nailed to the Tree? Who rose from the grave after three days (just as He said He would?) and now ever lives to make intercession for us?
What is tHis Name? Is this the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world?-or should we look for another?
Did He die for the sins of the world?-or for “Jewish” sins only?
Who then, -may be “saved?” (rescued, delivered) ?
Does “whosoever will” include the Gentile?
If love (benevolence toward others at cost to myself) must be demonstrated or shown towards others, and if love may be “measured” by sacrifice, – was there ever a greater love than Calvary’s love?
~ Because we have been declared righteous, therefore, by faith, we shall have peace with God in our Lord Yeshua The Messiah, for in Him we have been brought close by faith to this grace in which we stand, and we boast in the hope of the glory of God. And not only in this way, but we boast also in afflictions, for we know that affliction perfects patience in us, and patience, experience and experience, hope, and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has come in, overflowing our hearts by The Spirit of Holiness who has been given to us.
But surely because of our weakness, at this time The Messiah has died for the sake of the wicked. For a man will hardly die for the sake of the wicked, however a man perhaps may dare to die for the sake of the good.
~ Here God demonstrates His love for us, because if when we were sinners, The Messiah died in our place, how much more therefore, would we all the more be justified now by His blood and be saved from wrath by Him? For if when we were enemies, God was reconciled with us in the death of His Son, how much more therefore, in His reconciliation, shall we live all the more by His life? And not in this way only, but also we glory in God by our LORD Yeshua The Messiah, by whom we have now received the reconciliation ~
~ for God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself ~ (2 Corinthians 5.19)
the Logos became flesh and lived among us – Logos – word, not the “Bible” (as understood/accepted/translated) by most Christian denominations so much as Torah? Did not YWVH live Torah perfectly?
Did He die for the sins of the world?-or for “Jewish” sins only? What is a sin? Is it not the transgression of Torah? Living our lives the way that God would have us live them according to what He has said, within the frame work of the boundaries He has given us?
At times I find myself wishing I was born in a different age and then remind myself, that people have always been like they are now, grappling to know their creator. Did Daniel or Ruth or Ester or even David have an easier time in relation to God? All lived in different times, surrounded by people who made up their own belief systems about salvation..perhaps peace can be found in the journey when we accept Torah as the gift it was meant to be? For myself I find life more peaceful when I simply try to obey what I have been told and not try to rock the boat.
For myself I find life more peaceful when I simply try to obey what I have been told and not try to rock the boat. Me too, Jill..me too. The question is: “who told you? and who is your source?
~He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the Name by which He is called is The Word of God ~
(Revelation 19.13)
Yeshua haMashiach is (without a doubt) the Living Torah of YHWH.
http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/Yeshua/yeshua.html
Aleph v’Tev the beginning and the end…the ox and the cross? so much in a name
I love this!! Thanks so much. So beautiful.
“when he shall appear, we shall be like him” Its not about what we are doing. Its about who we are becoming. One flows from the other naturally.
It is said mothers are paid with the highest and best reward that can ever be, –for they are paid in pure and genuine love.
No words or thoughts can do justice to the astonishing love of a Holy God towards sinners, who can in no way either harm His reputation or be of use to Him. Sinners whom He could crush in a moment and be perfectly just in doing so, sinners who fully deserve His vengeance–we are shown how much so by the horror of the cross, –where He could bear everything put upon Him, but could not bear to let us go without providing a way to be reconciled to Himself. why? why? why? because He is love so pure and so beautiful and so holy that we can’t stand to examine but a tiny fragment of its blinding beauty.
Moses wanted to see His goodness, and He put him in the cleft of the rock to be shielded from the full impact of His perfect glory.
Do we search the whole universe for the best love story so that we can weep over its most glorious display? It is to be found in the person and the cross of Christ. There is the face that shows us the Father!
We have a God whose essence is love. We also have a God who cannot die. The greatest manifestation of love is to lay down your life for your “friends”. There is a quandry here. How to solve it? Take on mortal flesh. Become one of us to become one with us. The cross on one hand was redemption. The payment of a debt and satisfaction of the law which does not necessitate any feeling. These transactions are cold sterile and lifeless. Above and beyond that, the cross is an opportunity of eternity not just for us, but for God as well.It is His opportunity to make a passionate, powerful, overwhelming, mind blowing, no expense spared display of red hot love.
Add paradigm altering to the description of his love.
I appreciate your willingness to comment. However, as we investigate more and more of the text, I think you might find that the idea of payment for sin on the cross was an invention of the Reformers, not a part of Hebraic thinking. Some TWs begin to explore this. Suffice it to say that the Hebraic idea is about ransom from captivity, not about payment for sin. I have already raised a lot of issues about the cross as a point of redemption from sin. Satisfaction of the law is a Roman idea and made its way into Christian thinking because of the culture of the early fathers, not from Judaism.
First things first. Thankyou Skip for providing the forum and responding to comments. When I think about all the doctors of philosophy from Oxford that I am currently conversing with……..Oh! wait a minute, your the only doctor of philosophy from Oxford that will even give me the time of day. I have to contain myself a bit because I have hundreds of things to ask you about. I am a bit envious when I look at your life experience and I think it is very Jesus of you to hang around with hillbillies like me ( I am of the Ohio variety, Carl). I can tell you that “God has shown me” (I dont blame anyone for discounting that statement) some very simple yet profound concepts. They dont stem from a paradigm (that got demolished about 35 years ago) because most of these ideas i’ve never heard preached or taught by anyone. I think I will come at subjects from a different angle than other contributors. I will chuck ideas into the air when they are relevant and will not take offense if you shoot them down. “Ransom from captivity” actually fits the concept better than payment for sin. Thanks again skip. Looking forward to bouncing things off you.
Skip,
Your response comment here raises some questions in my mind.
As a relative newbie, I have, regretfully, not yet created the time to go through all your thoughts on “sacrifice from before the foundation of the world” and discuss things with some friends……but I will find that time as it is a topic of intrigue and importance.
Back to your comment yesterday, I am not at all sure that “the idea of payment for sin on the cross was an invention of the reformers” is valid. I plan to get into it further and review some scriptures over the weekend. But here is how I see this scenario at this point. Do we agree that sin is a debt to God and someone has to pay that debt?
I very much like your observation that “the Hebraic idea is about ransom from captivity.Most all humanity is in captivity and under the death penalty for our sins. The writer of Hebrews tells us:
“Therefore, HE has been made like His brethren in all things, that HE might become a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.” (Heb. 2:17)
This concept of ransom, I find very much a part of the Law of Jubilee and Law of Redemption found in Leviticus 25. Here I see Yahshua (verse 25) as the near kinsman who shows up and pays the ransom to redeem His country man. He is our elder brother after all!
Then, Paul tells us with a double witness: “You were bought with a price!” (1Cor. 6:20), (1Cor 7:23)
As I see it, Yahsua redeemed us, and now owns us! In process of agreeing to His redemption of us, we become His bondslaves! If we do not agree to these terms of redemption – there is no deal and our death sentence penalty for our sins stand! It’s a fabulous catch 22 from our God.
This is why I have some difficulty with your statement” Satisfaction of the Law is a Roman idea”. If you will pardon the half baked pun, I would consider satisfaction of the Law seems most definitely a Book of Romans idea, especially chapter 6:
“But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, and you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin (someone paid the price), you became slaves of righteousness.” (Rom.6:17-18)
Wish I had time to elaborate more here
Shalom,
While I won’t reiterate the entire line of thought here (since it has been articulated in detail over the course of many TWs), I will say that we need to be precise with our language. There is a debt to pay. That is a biblical (and Pauline) idea. But payment of a debt by penal substitution is an invention of the Reformers. Ransom is a biblical idea. Ransom is not the same as payment by penal substitution. The Reformers took an idea from the Roman culture and applied it to an Hebraic concept of atonement, but the Hebraic idea did not include penal substitution nor did it include the idea that the death on the cross was a penalty payment for sin. Think carefully about the implications of the difference between debt payment by substitutionary penalty and debt payment by ransom. Then see if you can’t distinguish between Paul’s Hebraic/Jewish concept and Calvin’s Roman/legal concept.
~ “If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.” Philip said to Him, “LORD, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father ‘?… ~ (John 14.8-11)
An area farmer and neighbor once said to me, “The Chicago Board of Trade? That’s the work of the Devil!” We citizens of affluent Western society are so used to thinking in terms of earnings and debts, investments and commodities…so easy to unwittingly think of God as a dispenser and controller of good things, at the right price. In reality, He simple IS good and invites us to share in that. My wife and I are blessed by this community and its encouragement to think a little higher.
I so love this
GOD IS SO NEAR
“Behold I stand at the door and knock…” Rev 3:20
MAN IS SO FAR
“men loved darkness rather than light…” Jn 3:19
WE ARE SO LOVED
“Let your light so shine before men…” Mat 5:16
GOD IS SO EVIDENT
“For we are His workmanship,created in Christ Jesus for good works,
which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.” Eph 2:10
“Play Station”?…
Apparently you are the only one who looks for irony in my titles. Yes, “play station.” Why? Because we think of play stations as something that delivers entertainment to us. When we treat God as the provider of salvation, we put Him in the same category. Give me something! The title was supposed to get people to ask, “How is my understanding of God like a play station?” Thanks for bringing attention to it.
Skip, Mark is not the only one who looks for irony in your titles 🙂 I appreciate how your titles draw attention to what you are trying to communicate in a unique way.
Thanks. Did you chuckle at “Beating a Dead Horse”?
Yes, I laughed, and rolled my eyes as I read the post and figured that you were reiterating the point in response to a particular person (who often reiterates a particular paradigm). Thank you, Skip, for teaching us so much more past the “milk” lesson that Torah is for today.
I laughed, too, shook my head in wonder that a man with your education is so reaction-oriented to a little grandmother, and wondered where you will get your inspiration when I am gone, (as I will be, just hang on), don’t give up hope! Lol.
I’m not quite so dense as you label me to be. I do understand that it is rather easy to file me away in a certain file, and lead all your readers into seeing that file heading when they see my name.
Kathryn isn’t the only one who rolls her eyes.
But I smile, and still do not disrespect you or talk ‘down’ to you.
I simply reserve the right to believe what I read in my Bible, and I cherish free speech, for myself, and Jaco, Judi, you, and everyone.
I pray for all of you, too, — I think that is a point of agreement among us all, and is a Godly exercise to engage in, we all come away better for it I think.
I admit I get carried away with what Jesus has done. What a Saviour! Is there enough words in all the world to say too much about Him?
I didn’t, horses are beautiful animals. I knew what was implied, but why choose a horse? Why not a donkey? Perhaps it might come to life, and speak against you. You know which donkey that is in the scriptures. 🙂
We are like wild horses, needed a firm hand to discipline, and then after you have the most loyal animal that obeys you like a dog.
Most horses once maimed are put to sleep, as they don’t serve their purpose any more.
Poor horse!
In that case, it sounds to me more like “Video On Demand”, but now I get your Play Station title.
Salvation is not something that arrives from God.Salvation is God.Salvation is not something that he delivers as separate. Is this how we can know that the people in ot times were saved or that they were part of the kingdom of heaven? (the ones following torah)
to the ones following torah . . . I have some good news . . .
………………………………………..God offers you/us HIS Righteousness
……………………………………………………IN CHRIST!
…………………………………………………….BY GRACE!
…………………………………………………THROUGH FAITH!
…………………………………………………………Why?
………….To demonstrate o/ o/ o/ God’s o/ o/ o/Righteousness!
Any righteousness that could be attained through the Law –even if it could be attained– is man’s righteousness; and would only last until one’s next sin . . .
so God offers us HIS Righteousness in Christ! WoW! echo: Wow! Wow wow
Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved.
For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.
For they
—> being ignorant of God’s righteousness,
—> and seeking to establish their own righteousness,
—> have not submitted to the righteousness of God.
—> For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. Rom. 10.1-4
Matt Maher sings it, he does a really nice job.
http://youtu.be/gS9e0nxHP-w
Dorothy,
Where on earth did you get the idea that those of us who follow Torah, do so to achieve salvation or righteousness??? You keep trying to put words in our mouths.
Hello…we get it…obeying G-d’s instructions is not what brings salvation!!! We obey because we love G-d, we’re eternally grateful for what He did for us through His Son Yeshua and his Holy Spirit, and we want to please Him and have the life He intends for us by following the instructions He gave us (to set us apart from the world.)
Yeshua paid for our sins before the foundations of the earth. His Resurrection conquered Death and guaranteed us eternal life.
What don’t you get about that. Please stop telling us what we believe or don’t believe.
Have not intended to put words in anyone’s mouth. :0 (rinse with a praise song)
Sincere question:
Would it be correct or incorrect to say that ladies and gentlemen who follow Old Covenant Laws: Feasts, days, dietary laws, wearing tzit tzit, etc. do so as -perhaps- a ‘fruit’ or ‘proof’ of salvation and or righteousness with God?
Yes, no?
Dorothy,
Commands such as:
Love God with all your being
Do not worship false gods
Do not use God’s Name in vain
Love your neigbors
Do not allow envy and jealousy
Respect your parents
Do not murder
Live sexually pure lives
Treat others fairly and justly
Always speak the truth
Show kindness and mercy
Give to the poor and needy
Look after orphans and widows
Always be fair in your business dealings
Etc. (I can carry on with this list and provide the proof texts if you want, but I’m sure you get the point)
All these “laws” are Old Covenant laws! But, I’m sure you will not object to anyone of us “Old Covenant followers” observing these laws? Would you? In fact, I’m sure you will argue these “laws” should be followed by “New Covenant followers” as well.
So, do people who follow the New Covenant do these things as as “fruit” or “proof” of salvation and or righteousness with God?
You see, your problem is not with Torah, it is with CERTAIN PARTS of Torah. Parts of Torah you do not understand, or choose not to understand. You do not have a problem with people being obedient to Torah, you only have a problem with people being obedient to CERTAIN PARTS of Torah that you have decided are obsolete.
Maybe it is time you actually investigate what Torah actually is. And it might also be a good idea to investigate what “covenant” actually is…
Do you think you bowled me over with that response? Nope.
A strong (in the Lord) little woman (a Ma’am, not a sir) stands before you.
When one is truly saved, “Fruit happens”. But what happens in the heart does not stay in the heart.
We don’t produce fruit; we bear fruit. It just happens as a result of being what God created it to be. One day in the sunshine and rain is just like another day. Ever see a peach tree checking its tassels?–(random thought)
Fruit is the outflow of the work of God’s Spirit and Grace in and through us, those being the Fruits of the Spirit as stated in Galatians 5:22-26. Those Fruits often manifest in the flesh as works of love and service to others, opening up ways for the sharing of the Gospel with those lost.
Yes, I could, and you can, still absolutely be demonstrating the Fruits of the Spirit while observing dietary laws, wearing tzit tzit, etc.
This is really my main point, for I don’t think y’all do understand my view.
I want to try to explain it better.
An interesting point to note is that Spirit-led Fruit tends to look outward with concern for others, hearts hurt and cry for the Lost, — while performance-led fruit tends to turn one’s focus inward, always self-examining to make sure they are in line with whatever system of law they’ve put themselves under.
If they have time, they busy themselves examining others, like Dorothy, the local church, the church you used to attend, etc, and all who declare themselves by the name ‘Christian’, exhorting them to also put themselves under the observances you feel ought to be done in order to achieve holiness before God so that they, too, can do as good as yourselves.
I see little time (if any) is left over for the lost, or for missions, for enjoying talk of the Holy Spirit and the Saviour.
The first Fruit of the Spirit is love.
The rest of the Fruits are all really elements, or subsets of love.
So, can we love each other, or not? If we’re all praying one for another, I think it will lead us into loving each other, too.
We’ll that’s certainly what Dorothy believes now, isn’t it!!!
and carl! Yeshau, our LORD Jesus- and He is “our” LORD, LORD of the Jew AND the Gentile- now how can the two be reconciled? – only *in Christ!* It is the the cross that reconciles and it is the cross that divides. What is the purpose of the Law? to show us (all) our need for a Savior. Even in the keeping or observing of the Law we still need a Savior for He has said (we do pay attention to His words,- right?) – “without Me- you can do nothing!” What is our motivation? Because we love Him..
NO, that would not be correct. First, they aren’t “Old Covenant” laws. The page in your Bible that says “New Testament” was put there by people who think that there is a difference between the Old and the New. There isn’t. If there were, Yeshua would have said so. And he didn’t. In fact, he said just the opposite.
Secondly, no one keeps the mitzvot as a “proof” of anything. We keep them because He asks us to. That’s it. When your children keep your instructions IN ORDER TO EARN YOUR FAVOR, something is very wrong with your parenting skills. But when they keep your instructions because they love you, oh – what a great feeling that is! Same with God.
It’s OK, Judi. Dorothy is reciting the paradigm of the Church for the last 1800 years. It’s a common refrain, well-trained by pastors and teachers who are not willing to look at the history or the ethnicity of the Messiah. But don’t hold her too responsible. She is simply telling us what she has been taught. That is where most of us were once. Someday perhaps she will look at the evidence from outside the paradigm, but until them she offers all of us a look into the world we once occupied, and for that I am grateful because it shows me just how powerful the mistaken view really is. Everything is viewed from inside the box.
Thanks Skip for the reminder that most of us held the same position at one time.
As Michael C. suggests, lets move on and stop engaging. That’s probably what Yeshua would suggest as well.
Dorothy,
NOBODY on this site believes that you attain righteousness through Torah obedience! NOBODY on this site (as far as I remember) have ever proclaimed that you get “saved” through keeping Torah or that you attain your own righteousness through Torah obedience!
You keep on posting this message over and over and over again and it has been pointed out numerous times that no-one believes what you are accusing everybody of believing, yet you keep on doing it.
Everybody on here (as far as I can remember), keep Torah because they believe it is the right response to God’s saving grace. They believe the Torah gives us the guidelines for righteous living – not because we want to attain our own righteousness – but, because we have been made righteous through Christ and we desire to live righteously. Two very different things! Everybody here (as far as I know) who keep Torah, do it because they love G-d and His Son Yeshua and they want to do what Yeshua said when He said “If you love Me, you will obey My commandments!”
I will say it one more time – we DO NOT believe that you attain righteousness or salvation through keeping the Torah. We believe you are obedient to Torah because you love G-d and His Son Yeshua, and the Torah is HIS guidelines for righteous living. it is a response to His saving grace.
Jaco,
Find a brick wall. Stand close and lean your head onto said brick wall quickly, forcefully and repeatedly.
That would be the equivalent, unfortunately, of attempting to converse around this issue with Dorothy.
There is no end to it.
I would suggest moving on. She has the capability of understanding. It’s just a decision with her. She chooses it. It’s plain.
Head. Brick wall. Rinse. Repeat.
End of story.
Well, my head is hurting at the moment… will take some aspirin… and won’t repeat.
Hate to sound so negative, however, it’s been rather exhausting at times. Feel free to engage, mine was just a friendly suggestion and awareness response.
Shalom
Or you could petition the Father to help her.
🙂
Been doing that.
Should give up the head banging exercises, though.
The patience God lends towards us is a better expression than head banging, huh?
Guess a good ol’ outdoor barbecue might help (sans pork, obviously!) provide some atmospheric discussion relief. I know a blog has limited relationship building opportunities. Maybe one day a backdoor eatery situation could help – breaking bread and contemplating together.
Until then, I’ll try to refrain from brick adjustment exercises with my head!
Yes, you are correct. But because Dorothy keeps saying something else, it should be fairly clear that neither your statements nor the evidence of Scripture nor historical fact nor the faith of the Jews will every change her mind. She doesn’t listen to what you really say because the PARADIGM tells her that you can’t really mean this. YOU are the one who is deluded because your claims don’t fit the paradigm. It is classic paradigm thinking. Don’t get upset. Just pray that somehow, someway God will pry open the mind.
I generally do not respond to these kind of remarks or observations, because I know they tend to lead nowhere. I’ve actually long ago decided to rather live a life of Torah obedience that will draw people into asking questions. I still have far way to go, but as the Rabbi’s teach – “one mitzvah at a time”.
But, I’ve been reading Gager’s “Reinventing Paul” and I kind of “felt” his frustration with 1800 years of theology that keeps on missing the point and continually falls prey to, as you mentioned, paradigm thinking. If people like E.P. Sanders and James Dunn can come so close and still fall short because of paradigm thinking, we (and by this I mean I) probably should be more understanding towards those who do not understand it the way we do. And, in the mean time we should pray, as you mentioned.
See you next week! Thank you once again for all you do.
While this gem may get lost at the bottom of a four day old post, it is a good as place to put it as any. The folks at Biblical Heritage Center came up with this “Guideline to help members of our study groups answer that question. We hope you will also use it and share it with your friends.
My belief system will be large enough to include all of the facts; it will be open enough to be tested; and, it will be flexible enough to change when errors are discovered or I become aware of new facts.
There are other alternatives:
I will ignore facts that disagree with my beliefs; I will refuse to allow others to question my beliefs; I will refuse to change my beliefs when errors are discovered; and/or, I will refuse to change my beliefs when new facts are discovered that disagree with them.
Which one do you think people who really want to know the truth choose”?
Well that is pretty clear to me.. Glad that you gave us that info.
I am pleased to hear that Jaco..
If that truly is the case as to what Skip has said.. I guess I am in the box too but from where I am in this box ; it is MY HIDING PLACE. And none other than the LORD HIMSELF.
Could you please tell me what I will find outside of the LORD HIMSELF ?
I’m not sure I follow your question? Would you please elaborate on what exactly you are asking or implying?
I get the feeling that you have us who may not see as you do in some sort of a box .
I also sense and I could be wrong that sarcasm is being used to try and win us to your understanding.
I do not sense that I am in a box nevertheless it may appear that way to others.
But if I am IN CHRIST as I am and yet am seen as “IN A BOX” , pray tell what is outside of this box that I am in ?
Carol, I never said or insinuated that you or anyone else is “in a box”. Nor was I sarcastic at any point.
Dorothy, in her original post, claimed that “we who follow Torah” try to attain our righteous through our Torah obedience. In other words, she claimed that we believe that we get saved through Torah obedience. I only pointed out, as many have done before, that nobody (as far as I can remember) has ever claimed this or said this. We all believe that following Torah is our loving response for BEING IN CHRIST. We follow Torah because we love God, we follow Torah because our Master followed Torah. Not because we want to earn our salvation. Yet, Dorothy continually post comments claiming that this is exactly what we are doing. If anything, she’s the one putting us in a box and refusing to engage in constructive dialogue regarding this issue.
My second comment to Dorothy, where I listed the commands like “loving your neighbor”, was anything but sarcastic. It was purely to show that there is no difference between what God expected from those who followed Him in ancient Israel and those who follow Him today. God has not changed. What he expects of those who follow Him has not changed. That was my purpose, as well is to answer Dorothy’s question (indirectly) that we follow all Torah because of our love for God, and not to proof anything.
I do not see you as in a box, or anything like that at all. I see you as a sister IN CHRIST. We just have different understandings of what a life, that has been made righteous through faith in Jesus, looks like. But, having said that, that understanding is not that different at all (hence my second comment).
Some of us claim to be “Torah observant” and some of us don’t. The reality is ALL OF US are obedient and disobedient in certain areas of Torah. That is why we need Jesus! It is because no can follow the Torah perfectly. Christians who believe that “Torah are done away with”, but who forgives others, are kind to strangers, looks after the poor and the widow, are just in their daily dealings, etc are actually all observing Torah, even though they claim they are not. Why? Because all those things are commanded in Torah. And in some things they are disobedient – and I’m not necessarily pointing to the feasts, Sabbath, etc.
The same applies for those of us who claim to be “Torah observant”. None of us are obedient in everything. We might observe Sabbath, the Feasts and wear tzit-tzit, but if we fail to forgive others. Or, if we are judgmental and unkind, if we fail to look after the poor and the needy, etc, we are disobedient in those areas of Torah and we completely miss the point of Torah.
The Torah describes how God wants to be worshiped and approached. The Torah also describes how God wants us treat those within our communities and the strangers we meet. Non of us are fully Torah observant! No one is. That’s why we ALL need Jesus. Some of us just put more emphasis on certain aspects of the Torah than others. Historical Christianity (for a lack of a better term) has placed the emphasis on the moral laws and disregarded the others. Many people I know, who claim to be “Torah observant”, place the emphasis on the ceremonial laws, etc and forget about the moral aspects.
I try my best, but do fail, to follow Jesus’ advice in Matt. 23:23
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you tithe the mint and the anise and the cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the Torah: the right-ruling and the compassion and the belief. These need to have been done, without neglecting the others.”
With fear and trembling I am trying to work out my salvation, doing my best to learn how God wants me to worship Him and love to others, with keeping the balance between the weightier matters of the Torah, and the lighter matters of the Torah. Knowing full well that the only reason I can do that was because of Jesus’ sacrifice and the help of the Holy Spirit.
So, I do not put you in a box and I was not sarcastic. And do not want to win you over to my understanding, because we are already on the same side. We just see things a bit differently.
Shalom.
Makes sense to me, Jaco. My being sort of resonants when reading things that make sense to me. Very clear statement in my understanding. Thx.
This is slightly off topic, but do tie in with Skip’s response to Dorothy and the discussion regarding the cross we’ve been having this past year. Yesterday I read the beginning of Acts as part of my daily readings, and something about Peter’s first two speeches (sermons) really made me think about our discussion regarding the cross.
In both speeches (Acts 2:14 – 36 & Acts 3:12 – 26) Peter’s central message or theme was Yeshua’s victory over death, that He was raised from the dead and sits at the right-hand of G-d. His victory over death was the reason why they (Jewish men and women listening to Peter) had to believe that Yeshua is the promised Messiah. Yeshua’s victory over death, and the disciple’s witness of it, was what prompted these men and women to believe that Yeshua was the Messiah and respond to Peter’s message. But, nowhere in Peter’s primary message was the forgiveness of sin ever mentioned with what happened on the cross. For Peter, the cross, death and resurrection pointed to Yeshua’s “Messiahship”, Israel’s King, G-d’s anointed One.
What is interesting, once the people heard Peter’s message and believed Yeshua was the promised Messiah, they responded “what shall we do?” At this point Peter replied “Repent, and let each one be immersed… for the forgiveness of sins” (Acts 2:38 – 41). This is why I think Skip is on the right road with his inquiry with regards to the cross, because Peter’s response the people’s “what shall we do?” was the same message preached by Yeshua Himself when He was on earth – “Repent for the Kingdom of G-d is at hand…”. It was the same as John the Immerser’s message – “Repent for the Kingdom of G-d is near…” Read any of the Prophet’s, and their primary message to the people is always “Repent and return to Torah.” The same can be said about any of the rabbinic literature with regards to the sacrifices, as well as Philo and Josephus’ discussion on the sacrifices, is that a sacrifice without a repentant heart and will to change was considered worthless.
So for me, Peter’s speeches in Acts confirm what we’ve been discussing so far this year. We receive forgiveness for our sins because we repent. We can do this because of the sacrifice of Yeshua that occurred on the Heavenly Altar before the foundation of the world. And this is true for all people who have ever lived before and after the cross. Yeshua’s death on the cross, His burial and resurrection has primarily to do with victory over death – the consequence of sin. The fact that He was victorious over death is also the ultimate sign that He is the true promised Messiah.
This was just what I was thinking yesterday and by no means a completed theology, just my thoughts on the journey so far.
This explanation rings very true as I’ve been thinking about it as well. It just makes more flowing and reasoned sense with the whole revealed scenario. Very good explanation as far as I can say at this moment of my digesting this whole concept Skip presented.
Thx.
For me, this concept has been one of the more interesting concepts this community has digested together. I’ve been enjoying the journey, for it has challenged me to think differently about certain texts. It has also opened up new ways of maybe understanding certain texts. Anyway, I’m looking forward to where this might go.
I’ve been enjoying your cycling analogies lately and your other insights. Have a good evening.
Thx Jacob. Ditto from me with your responses.
Auto correct. — I meant Jaco.
What an excellent observation. Peter is speaking to a Jewish and proselyte audience. He does not have to tell them anything about atonement because they already knew atonement comes via the sacrifices of torah. But DEATH? That’s another matter altogether. Thanks very much for this.
It is also interesting that in Acts 4 they get arrested because of their testimonies regarding the Resurrection, not because they told people to repent and get baptized. And they get released and threatened not to speak about the Resurrection any further.
Thx for the journey so far. Looking forward to be book…
Jaco Olivier,
Thank you for your keen insight on Peter’s central theme of Jesus’ victory over death and His ascension to the Father’s right hand in the second and third chapters of Acts! Thank you for tying it together with Skip’s recent emphasis on the King’s authority and triumph over death through a symbol of Rome’s supposed power over life and death, the execution stake.
In relationship to John the Baptist’s message in Matthew of “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” I find it interesting that Matthew is the only witness in the synoptic Gospel’s to mention John saying this particular phrase.
According to Brad H.Young’s book, Jesus And His Jewish Parables, pg. 202:
“Only Matthew attributes the preaching of the kingdom of heaven to John the Baptist; it seems that this is a secondary development. Here the text of Luke is preferable where Jesus preaches the kingdom and John calls the people to a baptism of repentance. 39)* John never became a part of Jesus’ kingdom movement even though according to the synoptics he was Jesus’ precursor. Thus even the least important participant in the kingdom of heaven movement gains prominence over John the Baptist.”
*Endnote 39, pg. 229 “Compare Matthew 3:1-2 with the text of Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3. In contrast to Luke and Mark who maintain that John preached a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, Matthew teaches that John proclaimed that the kingdom was at hand. Matthew seems to have transferred a dominical saying and attributed it to John (compare Matthew 4:17 and Mark 1:14-15 as well as Luke 3:3 and Mark 1:4). John’s ministry is certainly best understood as a revivalist movement in which he called the people to baptism and repentance. This is a sound evaluation of the historical evidence (Jos. Ant. 18:117; Mt 3:6; Mk 1:5; Lk 3:10-14; Mt 14:4; Mk 6:18). No doubt this is one reason that he received the appellation “John the Baptizer.” It is easy to understand how a saying of Jesus would have been attributed to John. For a different understanding of Luke 3:3, see H. Conzelmann, The Theology of St. Luke (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1961), p.23 and see note 1. Conzelmann tried to show that Luke had a motive in trying to say that Jesus was the first to proclaim the kingdom, “In Luke John is thought of as quite unconnected with the message of the kingdom.” But it seems that John preached repentance and Jesus proclaimed the kingdom. Dodd understood these texts, idem, Parables, p. 39, note 20.”
PSALM 61
Prayer of exile
For the choirmaster For strings Of David
In God alone there is rest for my soul,
….from him comes my safety;
with him alone for my rock, my safety,
….my fortress, I can never fall.
Hmmm
For me, “safety” is a good, calm, feeling
Thankyou Jaco that answers my question.Yashuas sacrifice in the heavenly alter would eliminate a time frame for john3:16
Your welcome. Yes, I agree with that.
I’ve been taking Biblical Hebrew classes online for a couple of months. Being ‘old’ lends itself to a more difficult task for me than when I was in my late twenties and early thirties. Whew! Things just don’t stick in my brain memory section as easily. Bottom line, it’s been hard work for me.
That said, I am beginning to see this structure in beginning to comprehend the syntax of Hebrew words. It is radically different than how we process it and think about it from an English standpoint.
For example, in yesterday’s lesson we came across two Hebrew word, just two. The two words in Hebrew are for “house” and “large/great.” In English, the two Hebrew words can assume either order position. The is “house” could be first OR “large/great” could be first in word order. Both ways translate “the house is large.” There is no specific definite article word separate, but a single Hebrew letter is added as a prefix that translates the “the.” There is NO verb, just a noun and an adjective. The ‘to be’ English verb is implied and supplied for the English translation.
So, looking at the Hebrew sentence we see only two words and literally read it as “house large” or “large house” but translate it for English with both a definite article and a ‘to be’ very, “is.” “The house is large.”
The real meaning from a Hebrew view would depend on which word was placed first, either ‘house’ or ‘great/large’ and the context of what came before it and after it, thus establishing the context.
It’s just a different animal and I’m ever increasingly amazed at how much we miss and how much is hidden
via the English translation.
It’s like witnessing the explosion of an atomic bomb with the intent on describing the WHOLE scene accurately and fulling with just one or two words. Very difficult.
Skip does a great job explaining this Hebrew-English conversion exercise that we need to understand to obtain the real honey and meat juices of the Hebrew Torah.
I have read hundreds of these daily readings, but this one really hit home with me. I will store this word in my favorites file. It just confirms everything that God has been teaching me about sonship. Thank you Skip for your time invested into these daily words. WOW!
Dorothy,
I respond here because there is no “reply” tab on your response.
First of all, I did not try to “bowl you over” with my response. I was merely trying to show that those things most “non-Torah observant Christians” (for a lack of a better term) see as commands that God expects them to obey, are actually as part of Torah as those commands that they deem obsolete. Secondly, I (and I think most people here) also do not see you as the “enemy”, or the other, or lost, or anything like that. I see you as a sister in Christ. Thirdly, I (and I actually think most people here) do not want to put you “under the observance [we] feel ought to be done to achieve holiness before God”.
(Side note: do you notice how you did it again? None of us have ever claimed that we try and achieve holiness through Torah observance.)
You said that “Spirit-led fruit” tends to look outwards towards others and their needs, while “performance-led fruit” look inwards and examine the self and are critical of others. With this I completely agree. I also agree that the Fruit of the Spirit (as mentioned in Galatians) is the outflow of the work of God’s Spirit and grace in us.
But, somehow, I get the feeling that you feel or have the impression (and I might be wrong) that those who claim to be “Torah observant” tend to produce “Performance-led Fruit”. And they tend not to produce “Spirit-led fruit” because they are too busy “observing Torah” to allow the Holy Spirit to actually work in their lives. Am I right in my assessment of your reply? Do you feel that those who “observe Torah” tend to produce “Performance-led Fruit”, and that this gets in the way of them producing “Spirit-led Fruit”?
I continued my readings in Acts, and found this interesting:
When Stephen upset the Congregation of the Freedman, they instigated men to bring FALSE witness against him and what he was preaching. Acts 6:11 – 14:
“Then they secretly instigated men who said, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and God… and they set up false witnesses who said, “This man never ceases to speak words against this holy place and the law, for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and will change the customs that Moses delivered to us.”
The FALSE WITNESSES said that Stephen said Jesus will “change the customs that Moses delivered”. Which obviously means that Stephen NEVER taught anybody that Jesus would change the Torah or believed that Jesus changed the Torah. So, this must obviously mean that if anybody today is teaching that Jesus did change the Torah given through Moses, they are disagreeing with what Stephen was teaching. In fact, they are making themselves guilty of the false charge that was brought against Stephen.
Jaco, thank you for the insights today.
I sometimes feel as if I’m under water and struggling to push my way to the top for a breathe of air. The muck and mire of the Historic Church (love that turn of phrase BTW) can be as a stranglehold even in Messianic congregations. But I read through a day of comments such as today and I am encouraged.
I think as individuals we are only able to see bits and pieces, but God allows the bit from one to make the pieces a little bigger for others, getting us closer to actually seeing the big picture. Amazing how the Body is supposed to work, isn’t it? 🙂
Wow Jaco, great words and thoughts you have shared here. I have been wondering what Skip was talking about when he alluded that the way the cross is viewed may need to be looked at again. I am new to this site by about 4 or 5 months and I feel like a dry sponge soaking up the history and culture of the Jews and Jesus!
I have much to think on. Praise Y-H for your open eyes and ears and willingness to share that here.
This changes the whole view of the cross and forgiveness for sins being why we are “saved.” Understanding that Y-H IS salvation began that rethinking and now I have a bit more meat.
This point has been missed or maybe obscured over time.
Shalom brother.
Dear Dawn,
You can retrace the discussion on this topic by searching for the opening verse, Revelation 3:18. It went on for quite awhile and is still brewing. A book is coming.
But I don’t think the point was missed or obscured. I think the shift was deliberate in order to distinguish Christians from Jews. Lots about this on this site and in my lectures.
A book is good! I will watch for it and I will search out the opening discussion for this topic.
I don’t even know why I made that last remark. Sometimes I am like a kid who doesn’t know when to stop coloring and the pretty picture gets ugly. I apologize for running on at the mouth.
I have a long history of people pleasing and avoiding conflict by riding the fence. That comment is a remnant of those days I think. I do not like that in myself and although it is difficult, Y-H is slowly washing it out. Out damn spot-OUT!! (a welcome change)
It was not some mistake or oops. It was deliberate and I have done lots of reading and searching both here and other places. I agree with your thought there completely!
Jaco that is a powerful observation!
A day late yet have to share. One of the best ah -ha moments was when I realized this very thing about Yaweh. He is salvation yes. It isn’t what He does it is who He is. Just like He is healing not what He does but who He is. We spend so much time looking outside for things of satisfaction and for wholeness but we really only need to do what He says and with His presence is everything we are looking for. GLORY!
Quoting you: “Salvation is not a thing nor is it a place. It is a relationship I have as long as He participates with me.”
Are you not implying it is possible to stop God from participating with us?
By the way I purchased at Beit Tikvah and am reading “The Lucky Life”
It certainly seems possible for human beings to stop participating in the relationship. We are capable of walking away from God. And it certainly appears as if the Bible suggests that God will one day walk away from those who reject Him. They will experience wrath, not fellowship.