The More We See
the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked. 1 John 2:6 NASB
In the same manner as – No one who claims to know Jesus will deny the truth of John’s statement. If we say we have fellowship with Yeshua and that we participate in His unwavering love, then, says John, we ought to behave as He behaved. We ought to walk in the Way. More than that, we should be living in the same manner as He lived. The Greek is a bit more complicated. Literally it says, “ought as that one walked also himself to walk.” “In the same manner as” is an attempt to capture the meaning rather than the exact wording. But we get the picture, don’t we? We see that if anyone is really a follower of Yeshua, that person will approach life with the same code of conduct, the same frame of mind and the same attitude of heart. John could hardly make it any clearer when he states the opposite. “If anyone says he knows God but doesn’t keep the commandments, that person is a liar.”
With this in mind, great New Testament scholars like F. F. Bruce can say “obedience is the full flowering of our love for Him,”[1] and “the character of God will be displayed in those who abide in Him,” and “so the life of Christ in His people will be manifested as their behaviour resembles His.”[2] Apparently everyone on both sides of the great Messianic divide agrees. Those who call themselves by His name must demonstrate His actions.
Then how come Christians in general don’t follow the actual behaviors of Yeshua? How come they worship on Sunday (He didn’t) and celebrate Christmas and Easter (He didn’t) and eat whatever they wish (He didn’t) and tithe according to the needs of the mortgage debt (He didn’t) and say blessing before meals (He didn’t) and pray to Mary (He certainly didn’t!) and restrict women to certain roles (He didn’t) and treat the Church as a replacement of Israel (He didn’t)? How can great scholars like F. F. Bruce (and many more) say this and, at the same time, remain within the religion of Christianity? The answer is paradigm shift. What John says as a Jewish Messianic believer is transformed into something a post-apostolic age Christian would say. In other words, John’s words are re-interpreted by the Church! The paradigm says that John converted from Judaism to Christianity and therefore, all that John says must fit within the Christian idea of following, not the Jewish idea.
Can there be any doubt about the meaning of John’s phrase “in the same manner as” from a Hebraic point of view? No! The words are used over and over in the Tanakh to describe a way of life centered in Torah obedience. That is, in fact, the way Yeshua lived. But for most Christians these texts have been adjusted to fit the theological commitments of the Church. The words are the same, but the meaning is radically different. The paradigm provides the meaning. It always has. The question is which paradigm makes the most sense: the one that governed the culture, ethos and language of John as a Jew or the one supplied by Origen, Chrysostrom, Augustine, Aquinas and Luther?
If Jesus was a Jew, then where did Christian thinking come from?
Topical Index: Torah, obedience, in the same manner as, 1 John 2:6, F. F. Bruce
[1] F. F. Bruce, The Epistles of John, p. 52
[2] Ibid., p. 53.
At the cost of losing some FB friends, I shared this on my FB page. Sometimes the truth hurts. Thank you Skip for putting into words what many of us stand by.
How am I walking?
And…
How will they know if we don’t tell “them” ? In love and deep concern….for eternity.
-“everyone on both sides of the great Messianic divide”
It is sin that separates and sin only. Our Father (yes, the very same G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) is the G-d of reconciliation and unity. “G-d was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself.” I truly believe, (a Carlism), G-d’s favorite number is “one.” There is one LORD, one Faith, and one Baptism. We (you and I) are one in the bond of love. His love- the “love from above!” How good and how pleasant it is for brethen (and sisterern!) to live in unity! They will know your are my talmudim, if you love one another.
Good morning, family! “Behold, what manner of love the Father has given unto us (you and I) that we (you and I) should be called the sons (and daughters) -children of G-d. Oh, but don’t our children love to squabble! lol! Brother Skip,- I’m reminded at this point “the love of the Father is not “zero-sum.” We (each) do not get a slice of the pie, we (each) get the whole pie!- the prodigal (lavish) love of the Father as if we were the only “ones” ever to live. Oh dear friends, -know the love of the ONE! Oh- don’t get me started!! lol!
Now to discuss “the church.” Return to Ruth. She was not a Jew, neither was she a Gentile. She was a “half-breed,” a mix..lol!- a mongrel. Her claim to fame?- none. It was all about Boaz, “our” Kinsman-Redeemer,- our mighty go-el. Hallelujah for a Savior (Israel, prince with G-d) whose love extends to “whosoever will.” His open invitation? “Come unto Me..” Yes, -to the Jew first, and (praise G-d), -also to the Greek. “Whosoever will” may come. I am one of the whosoevers.
Much damage on both sides of the aisle in the name of “religion.” Can you imagine the squawking going on inside of Noah’s Ark of Safety? Did Noah get any sleep during those forty days and nights?
Will I defend the atrocities of the church? No, I will not, but neither will I judge any man. There is one Judge of all mankind, and judgment belongs to Him and to Him alone. Name the name of Christ and I will call you my brother. There will be a division of wheat and tares one day, and G-d (the only righteous Judge) will do the dividing. “This one is mine, this one is not.” A tare looks mighty like wheat, but G-d knows the difference and we (all) should let Him decide. “By their fruits you shall know them..”- Yes, judge me (if you must and if you do you have far too much time on your hands)- I stand before my Maker with this plea. “That ONE died for me!” “This my pardon, this my plea- nothing (nothing) but the blood of Jesus.”
This I know also. The church the “catholic/universal” called out assembly, the chosen ones, the bride of Christ, is just that..- the bride of Christ. Don’t be messin’ with the bride. He said, (are we listening?)- “I will build my church.” The program of G-d is “build a bride.” This is who we are, this is our identity. On this side of the exit door marked “death” we are His body on a mission to save/rescue/deliver as many as possible and gather them into the kingdom (rule and reign) of G-d. Mission 3.16. The Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost. We are to live the gospel (good news) of Christ every day and every moment of every day and yes, we are to bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of (the) Christ. Dear friends, -“it is written.” Look in the book. Read and follow label directions. Hear and obey. “Shema,” O Israel. (the people/children of G-d).
“If any man (Jew or Greek, male or female, bond or free) be in Christ, he is a new creation.” The (only) question we should ask is this: Am I (or am I not) in Christ? Do I (or do I not) belong to Him? Does He “own” me, -lock,stock and barrel? What difference (if any) has Christ made in my life? Am I being made new every day? Have I “seen” G-d working in my life? (yes, -up close and personal..for He is our ADONAI. We may say with Rabbi Sha’ul..- “my G-d.” The LORD is “my Shepherd”- I shall not want.
Is “Eternal Life” -the very life of Jesus, (who is the)Christ, a quantity or a quality?
Thank you for this word today. This is so true!!!
Wow, more new insight, confirmation of beliefs, keep it coming friend,,,,,,,,,,,,,
“If Jesus was a Jew, then where did Christian thinking come from?”
Although I have never read any scholarly works on what I now think is probably the case.
I think that scholarly Jews probably taught gentiles how to think like Catholics.
The Talmud seems to me to be just way too similar to Catholic ideology to be a coincidence.
And most Jews are not unlike me; a gentile who wants to do well in this world.
Most of us do not want to end up like Jesus, Job, or Billy Budd; it is just too painful.
I think it’s a bit more complicated and a bit more nefarious. Try Marianne Dacy, “The Separation of Early Christianity from Judaism”
“a bit more complicated and a bit more nefarious”
Hi Skip,
I understand 🙂
My point.
And what boggled my mind, when you recommended Everyman’s Talmud some time ago.
Was the fact that basically everything I considered to be Christian morality and theology.
Could be found in the Talmud; minus, of course, the myth of the dying God, which is pagan.
But, in my experience with Catholicism, there was very little focus on Jesus.
Catholicism was much more oriented toward Our Father and the Holy Mother of God.
One more point is that for me the Talmud, like Catholicism, is systematic and easy to teach.
The Torah is neither.
Skip,
I am a little confused when you say Yeshua didn’t say a blessing before meals. As a Jew, I bless Adonai before and after I eat. Was blessing Adonai before we eat something that became part of Jewish tradition after Yeshua’s time?
I do think it is strange people think they can practically turn potato chips into health food if they say a blessing or they ask for the food to be blessed. Uh, in what way can that happen? Most of my Christian friends have no idea what I’m talking about when I mention things like this to them and they don’t really seem to care. However, I can see there is a movement afoot for people who are looking for more than what they have been taught.
Do you ever read Derek Lehman’s blog or books? He’s a Messianic rabbi who has great insights. Today I received an email from him in which he was very enouraged by the response of the churches he has been visiting. I think people may be getting more hungry–see, another great reason to say a blessing 🙂 Baruch HaShem
Ah, good point. I was only trying to highlight the fact that Torah commands blessing after meals while Christians have turned this upside down. Of course, Torah does not ask us to bless the FOOD either. But the blessing before meals is undoubtedly tradition and was probably practiced by Yeshua too (although there is no record of such).
Matt 14:19?
OK, is this a reference to Yeshua’s blessing before distribution of the loaves and fish? It’s funny that the NASB introduces “the food” into the verse. It is not there in the Greek, of course, since Jews do not bless the food. They bless God who gives food. And my point, which I should have made clear, is exactly that. Yeshua does not bless the FOOD before a meal. I should have written it better.
Shabbat Shalom,
Abba’s love is so much greater than any earthly parents love. Any godly parent or parents desire to teach their child or children through their actions and words, how to put off what is wrong, and put on what is right. We do not set them up for failure, but for empowered Holy Spirit success! How much more does our Greater Abba, desire this for all His children? His ways are accessible and doable. The beloved John has captured and is expressing the tenderness of Abba’s heart in this passage; and the longing and simplicity for us to walk out, in like manner, the way of Yeshua. I believe John has captured the intensity of our Abba’s cheering us on in loving Him and loving others. I can hear Him say, “We can do it!” Can you hear Abba’s cheering for you/us today?
The question might be this one” is there a prohibition from worshiping on Sunday? And the answer would be only if it is a substitute for some Torah requirement.
But most of us will breathe a sigh of relief to know that with the historic change concerning Sabbath, the death penalty for Sabbath violation was also dropped. The challenge is this one: How do we demand requirement of Sabbath (Ex. 31:14-15) without at the same time demanding the penalties for Sabbath violation?
Ian,
Any death penalty due under Torah law can only be enacted on the testimony of 2 or 3 witnesses, testifying before a properly constituted temple court (which includes the High Priest). Since we don’t a) have a temple or b) have a High Priest serving on earth (Yeshua is our High Priest serving in the heavenly tabernacle) there is no-one on earth to hear the testimony of the witnesses or pronounce the death sentence. And who will be prepared to testify against a brother, when we all know that we have committed the same sin at some time in our lives?
That will happen, however, on the day of judgment – the witnesses will be called and the sentence will be pronounced. Then will be the announcement that the sentence has been fulfilled by Yeshua in our stead. Praise YHVH!
But, of course, we do not “demand” the requirements of Shabbat. As our brother Carl so beautifully stated, “Obedience issues forth from love”. Obeying the commandments should be done out of fear or a sense of duty, but out of love and a desire to please our Dad.
Now wait! Why wouldn’t we expect the violation to include the prescribed penalty? Are you suggesting that since we decided not to honor the Sabbath on the Sabbath, we were also free to change the penalty? Are we God? Do we simply change His instructions because we have a “higher” moral understanding?
Just one other aside. Penalties represent the maximum that is allowed under the Mosaic code, not the minimum, not even the usual.
Shalom Ian, Rodney, and Skip,
I have just lost my blogging twice now…….. Christopher J. H. Wright addresses this issue in his book,’Walking In the Ways Of The Ways Of The Lord- The Ethical Authority of the Old Testament,’ pp. 105-106, (2) What is important about the penal system of Israel’s law is the scale of values it reflects rather than the literal prescriptions themselves. Careful study of Israel’s penology shows that the range of offences for which the death penalty was applied had to do with the central concerns of protecting the convenant relationship and the family/household unit within which the relationship was preserved and experienced. The gradation of penalities also shows a clear priority of human life over property and other priorities which challenge the sometimes distorted values of our modern judicial systems. It is certainly possible to set the scale of moral values reflected in Israel’s penalities over against those of our own society and then to observe shortcomings and suggest reforms in order to bring our own system of law and justice more in line with bibical priorities. But this need not take the form of seekinf to re-impose Old Testament penalities as they stand. This points seems to be reinforced theologically by the fact that in the New Testament it appears that neither Jesus nor Paul wanted to apply the full weight of the Old Testament penal system, for adultery or for false teaching.
Thirdly, it seems to me that theonomy overstates the importance of the pentateuchal laws within the overall balance of the Old Testament canon. Now it is obvious that the Torah (as a whole; it should always be rememberd that the includes narratives as well as law codes) has a foundational role, and is celebrated in the Psalms and held up against the people by the prophets. Nevertheless, it seems significant that the historical narratives and prophetic texts (and certainly the Wisdom literature) do not often quote specific laws or call for their implentation, or for specific penalities to be enforced.
Not as often, that is, as one would expect if the written, standing law had had quite the central importance in Israel’s everyday social affairs as theonomists imply. In fact, if the law was as definitive as theonomists claim, then the narratives portray apparent inconsistencies- the most notorious being the lack of capital punishment on either Cain or David. It is agruable that a truly prophetic response to the needs of society would not place quite the emphasis that theonomy does on law and punishment. The Old Testament seems aware of the limitations of that approach. End of quote.
Hope this helps! Highly recommend Mr. Wright’s book and his other writings/books in general. In His Care, Brian
Hi Brian
Thanks for the quote from Wright. I’m not sure, however, it provides answers to the questions at hand.
1. Yeshua was quite clear on two occasions about Torah: a) He did not come to abolish one jot or tittle, (Matt 5:17f); b) In Luke 5:46-47 Yeshua makes it quite clear that it is necessary to understand Moses (Torah) in order to understand His words.
2. These words require a hermeneutic that starts with the Torah. This is the idea of sola scriptura applied by Yeshua. It requires that the New Covenant — the law written on our hearts and minds (Jer 31:31, Heb 8:10) — documents be read through the “lens” of the Old Testament, and any interpretation that does not conform to Torah is to be rejected.
3. This issues cannot be settled by blanket statements such as Wrights, “theonomy overstates the importance of the pentateuchal laws”. It can only be addressed in specific application of Torah solutions to real problems. Examples:
a) Is there a requirement to keep just weights and measures, or can the butcher press his finger on the scale and deliver “short” weight. If he does this, is there a penalty, if so what is it?
b) In teh same vein, the just weights and laws (Lev. 19:35-36) have been applied to money and would require the government to at least maintain the value of money, rather than devaluing it through inflation?
c) Should a thief be made to repay what he stole, plus somewhere between 20-500% additional, or is the current situation the “right” one, where victims of thieves not only lose their goods, but must pay insurance to cover the loss, pay for the trial of the thief, if the thief is incarcerated, they also pay for his time in jail, they may pay support for the thief’s family — and they NEVER get their goods returned.
Take a 7-year old child and catch him thieving and he knows he needs to give it back. But put that thief in our public schools, send him to law school, make him a judge, and all of a sudden, restitution is no longer the right thing.
Get the idea? Torah (Moses) then Yeshua. Or, Old Covenant then New Covenant. Too many folk within Christianity have reversed the process and lost the plot.
Francis Schaeffer asked the question: “How Should We Then Live.” Yeshua’s reply to Satan in his temptation to turn the stones into bread still stands: By every word that proceeds from the the mouth of YHWH — of which, not one jot or tittle has been abolished, reduced, replaced, or superseded.
Wonderful. Thanks.
Shalom Ian,
Thanks for your response. Writing down another man’s writing creates more problems than what one hopes for. Not being able to bring in the full context of what Wright has written (before and after) is a definite challenge, and I hope I did not miscommunicate Mr. Wright’s intention or aim.
The force of what I was trying to communicate was that the Father’s heart and intention is one of life and compassion. We always need to read the maximums penalities of Torah within that prism. God’s compassionate heart has not changed from the TaNaK to the Apostolic Writings. My point was that Torah is for life and living. These maximums are exactly that “MAXIMUMS,” and were definitely not the standard within Israel. These maximums left plenty of room for God’s compassion to be revealed, and people to be reconciled back to God and the community.
It seems to me there was always a move toward life and compassion in both the TaNaK and the Apostolic Writings (even when the maximum injunctions were carried out). I do believe Mr. Wright communicates that point.
Indeed, there is a good example of this while Moshe is up on the mountain with YHVH, while the people below get impatient and demand of Aharon that he “make them a god”. YHVH’s anger burns against the people and he says to Moshe, “Let me alone, that may anger may burn against them. I will destroy them all and make of you a great nation” (which would still have fulfilled the covenant with Avraham, since Moshe was one of his descendants).
How does Moshe respond? He intercedes for the people. The scriptures record that YHVH repented and showed mercy in response to the prayer of Moshe. There were still consequences to be borne, and 3000 died, but the nation was not destroyed. (YHVH does not destroy the righteous with the wicked).
Monte Judah makes the point that YHVH holds justice in one hand, mercy in the other (ignoring the obvious anthropomorphism) and only He can properly weigh up the balance between the two. He always prefers to show mercy rather than execute justice, when given the opportunity to do so. How is YHVH given the opportunity to show mercy? When approached with true repentance (which must needs be followed by obedience if it is indeed true repentance).
There are many other recorded instances of repentance leading to YHVH’s mercy; unfortunately there are also many cases when the opportunity for true repentance was refused and thus justice was rendered rather than mercy (witness the dispersion of the northern kingdom of Israel among the nations, still in effect today).
You’re both right, Brian and Ian. The Torah is clear with regards to its requirements (and many of our modern laws are based on principles founded in Torah, even though our regulators are unlikely to admit it; for example, the requirement to built a barrier around your roof to prevent someone falling off and injuring themselves seems to me to be the first recorded instance of “Occupational Health and Safety Regulations”) and the rest of scripture should be understood with that as the starting point (although many don’t like that paradigm), however YHVH is merciful and compassionate and desires that we would seek his mercy and compassion rather than his justice. Nevertheless, his patience is not endless and his desire for mercy is not “cheap grace” providing a license to ignore his commandments (the point of John’s letter).
Looking at the full text of 1 John, it seems that it was written as a teaching on the Torah portion called “va’etchanan” – Deut 3:23 – 7:11 (and more specifically Deut 6 and 7).
Shalom Rodney,
Thank you for your thoughtful response this morning.
One thing that has turned my world upside down (in a good way) is the understanding that Abba’s heart is for our success in walking out His instructions. Deuteronomy 30:11-14, ia a perfect example of our Father’s intent in relationship to our walking out/obedience, His instructions and commandments. This is what I believe the Apostle John has captured and is communicating in this particular letter.
At the same time, I do fully believe in His justice, and believe that it is not divorced from His compassion and mercy. He is the only ONE who can bring true judgement to this twisted world. Until that fullness of time, we have an oppurtunity to participate and partner with Him in the power of the Holy Spirit, to live out His instructions and see His kingdom expand in this world. Thanks for the Torah portion reference. I will check it out. In His Care, Brian