THE NEW....Wisdom In Torah Forum

1. 

   ThegreatRx
   Member
   Posted 3 months ago #
   

   I got on a train of thought the other day which confused me a bit and I hope you don’t mind me sounding it out:

   I believe that all followers of Yeshua should be Torah observant despite many claims I hear in the Messianic movement. Some for instance state that gentiles need not be Torah observant and that the verses stating that there is one law for both, is specifically referring within the context of believing gentiles wishing to make sacrifices or partake in the pasach or some other ritual. Two different sets of rules in the same house never made much sense to me, but then I read Dev 14:21 which states: “you shall not eat anything that has died a natural death; give it to the stranger (ger) in your community to eat.. “

   The Stone Edition Chumash has a commentary (pp 1013) regarding this that states “to the stranger: ie, a gentile who resides in the Land and has agreed to observe the Noahide laws, but is permitted to eat non-kosher meat (Rashi). Obviously the word ger in the context cannot be rendered proselyte, since a carcass is no less forbidden to a proselyte than to any other Jew”.

   This does indeed seem to make a distinction between the stranger (ger toshav) and the full proselyte (ger tzedek) and/or Jew. All the other numerous scriptures used to refute Torah observance for gentiles are scriptures that state strangers should observe in various circumstances, but this the first one I can think of that gives a witness to them NOT having to observe something a proselyte/Jew is required to observe. Then I recalled Isaiah 61 which is a verse I have always seen as prophetic for the millennial reign – 61:5-6 “And strangers shall stand and pasture your flocks, Aliens shall be your plowmen and vinetrimmers. But you will be called the priests of the LORD; You will be spoken of as Servants of our God…” Could this be indicating that Christians who believe in the One true Yah and His Yeshua, but are only observant of the Noahide laws will serve as servants to Israel who have taken the full yoke of His Torah, in the Millennial reign? Since salvation is dependent on faith alone and not works of the Torah, could this be the judgment that awaits believers for deeds done in the body both good and bad?

   Interested in your feedback :). Toda!

2. 

   Ryan White
   עבד (Servant)
   Posted 3 months ago #
   

   Shalom!!

   I'm glad that you believe that all believers in Yeshua Messiah should be Torah observant. Just as a forewarning, I am going to rant a little bit because this double standard teaching that has invaded the Messianic/HR movement really gets under my skin.

   What does this teaching that there is one set of commands for "Jews" and another set for "Believing Gentiles" (which is an oxymoron) really saying about our Elohim? Are we to believe that because of someone's supposed blood lineage to Abraham that they are required to follow a strict set of commandments while others can pretty much just do what they want? In my opinion, that paints a very unjust picture of Elohim and crosses into the boundary of making His name of no effect. It is just as insulting as the replacement doctrine that the church preaches. Both doctrines go against the image of YHWH that He has painted of Himself in the Tanakh and First Century Writings.

   Part of the problem is the terms "Jew" and "Gentile". A "Jew" today essentially means that somewhere in that person's family line, there was a family member that followed Judaism as a religion. It does not guarantee that said person is a direct descendant of Abraham because the Judaism root may have come from a conversion or that person could have descended from one of the mixed multitude that came out of Mitrayim (Egypt). I'm even sceptical of DNA testing as a means of proving blood lineage to Abraham. In the first century, the term "Jew" was used of anybody who was from the land known as Judea. For example Harod was an Edomite, and yet he was also considered a "Jew". The term "Jew" was also extended to those living outside the land who followed Judaism as a religion, such as Paul and should be the term used for anyone who is a believer in YHWH and has a circumcised heart (Rom 2).

   A "Gentile" is a term that by itself means a heathen person or nation (although 'goy' is occasionally used in reference to Yisrael). There is only one nation that is in covenant with Yah and the Hebrew word 'am' is used to describe them as a nation or people instead of 'goy'. Now, there is evidence that the Rabbi's knew of the whereabouts of the descendants of the lost House of Yisrael in the first century and referred to them as 'goy' or Gentiles, since the prophecies foretold of them becoming Gentiles (i.e. heathens). Regardless of whether this is true or not, Romans 11, Galations 3, James 1 and many other passages all state that those who were once far off, having no hope in the world have been brought near through the blood of Mashiyach Yeshua and are now heirs according to the covenant. Thus they are no longer strangers, they are now as the native-born. And as such, their children are native born. Those coming into the faith from a pagan background could be referred to as former Gentiles, but a person who was born and raised in the faith, even if that faith didn't have everything right, is still a natural olive branch, because they were born into the covenant.

   This rabbinical proselyte phase of belief is in my opinion anti-Scriptural and is a doctrine that I believe was proved false when Keffa had the vision of the unclean animals and was shown that he should not call any man that YHWH has purified "common". Coming into covenant with the Creator is not something controlled by a group of Rabbis, it is something between that man/woman and God. This proselytism was simply another step of separation that Rabbis used to slow the influx of believers into Judaism because it was (probably) weakening their control over the religion. There is not one single passage that I know of that states that anyone gives permission to come in covenant with Yah. Exodus 12 just states that he and all his household males become circumcised and partake in the Pesach (a picture of circumcision of the heart and acceptance of Yeshua's blood sacrifice).

   Now, that being said, Rashi was correct that Gentiles do have a different Torah...The Torah states that an animal that dies of natural causes or being torn apart by a beast can be given to an unbelieving Gentile that lives in the land. So there are laws for Gentiles in the land, but those are laws for unbelievers, not for believers.

   As for your question about Christians being servants to Torah-observant believers, I wouldn't even want to guess. Yah will judge their heart. I believe they will not be held accountable for the lies they believe, but rather the truths they rejected.

   I hope this answers your question,

   Shalom,
   Ryan

3. 

   ThegreatRx
   Member
   Posted 3 months ago #
   

   thanks Ryan! I feel your passion and share your sentiments. It is sad that there is so much disunity within the messianic community and it saddens me. We are all trying to stay on the narrow path. That word "ger" in the hebrew (as opposed to "goy") threw me a bit though (certainly not Rashi's commentary - but the actual hebrew word used in the scripture) jumped out at me as a possible evidence that perhaps the "two different rules" camp might have a leg to stand on afterall and I should quite beating them up (LOL). I suppose the hebrew word ger could mean a pagan gentile and not a God fearing stranger that lived among them. At the end of the day, I still believe in my heart that we have one Abba and he expects the same from all his children who live under his wings.
   Keep on in the faith!

4. 

   Yedida
   Member
   Posted 3 months ago #
   

   Shalom,
   Just an FYI.
   Most of the Noahide groups, especially B'nai Noach, that are run by the Jewish sects, with their own rabbis strongly intimate (if not actually require) that one should renounce Yeshua/Jesus if one is Christian. Those that are run by previous Christian pastors, at this point, I can't say one way or the other about that matter. (There are two that I am aware of around my area and they are a run off of a common denomination. One is an Independent Free Baptist Church, another one is an Independent Baptist Church (not sure if it's really an IFB or not.)

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.