Torah in Christianity

[IndigoChild5559]

A whole age named after Him. He sounds important.
Abraham was important in his age and Moses in his and David in his etc. The Messiah is important in His age and that age goes on forever if Messiah Ben David is on His throne forever. And that age has already begun with the coming of Messiah Ben Joseph who happens to also be Messiah Ben David because of those prophecies that the Jews missed but are plain with belief in Jesus and what is said about Him.
Jesus came as a man under the law and is the judge of all who are and who are not under the law.
Moses gave the Law and Covenant, what right did he have to do that!
Jesus came with the New Covenant, the one promised by God, and gave the new way to fulfil what is given in the Law of Moses.

The Messianic age does not go on forever. It is followed by the end of the earth as we know it, the resurrection, and the world to come.

Yes, the messiah is important in that he is the king during the messianic era. But he is less important than the era in terms of how much of the Torah is devoted to him.

There is no Messiah ben Joseph. The only people who talk about this are Christians. The messiah is NOT the suffering servant.

There is no teaching in the Tanakh that we must believe in the Messiah in order to obtain eternal life.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

The LORD is full of gifts for Abraham and even without the Law Abraham is declared righteous because of his believing God.

Genesis15:1 After this, the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision:
“Do not be afraid, Abram.
I am your shield,
your very great reward.”
2 But Abram said, “Sovereign Lord, what can you give me since I remain childless and the one who will inherit my estate is Eliezer of Damascus?” 3 And Abram said, “You have given me no children; so a servant in my household will be my heir.”
4 Then the word of the Lord came to him: “This man will not be your heir, but a son who is your own flesh and blood will be your heir.” 5 He took him outside and said, “Look up at the sky and count the stars—if indeed you can count them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.”
6 Abram believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness.
7 He also said to him, “I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to take possession of it.”

But of course complacency is possible even for those who are to keep the Law. Christians are warned about this and repentance is an important step in turning to Jesus.

Jeremiah 7:1 This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: 2 “Stand at the gate of the Lord’s house and there proclaim this message:“‘Hear the word of the Lord, all you people of Judah who come through these gates to worship the Lord. 3 This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Reform your ways and your actions, and I will let you live in this place. 4 Do not trust in deceptive words and say, “This is the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord!” 5 If you really change your ways and your actions and deal with each other justly, 6 if you do not oppress the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow and do not shed innocent blood in this place, and if you do not follow other gods to your own harm, 7 then I will let you live in this place, in the land I gave your ancestors for ever and ever. 8 But look, you are trusting in deceptive words that are worthless.
9 “‘Will you steal and murder, commit adultery and perjury, burn incense to Baal and follow other gods you have not known, 10 and then come and stand before me in this house, which bears my Name, and say, “We are safe”—safe to do all these detestable things? 11 Has this house, which bears my Name, become a den of robbers to you? But I have been watching! declares the Lord.

Christians should and are encouraged to keep God's Commandments in loving God and our neighbour, but without knowing our need for forgiveness and mercy there is danger in becoming proud,,,,,,,,,something God hates.

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with my point, which was that there is no such thing as imputed righteousness.

 

[Truthseeker]

You did forget this:

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

When shall it be fullfilled? The answer is this:

30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. John 19:30

So before Jesus death, all had to follow the laws in the Torah. After Jesus death christians do not have to follow the laws in the Torah.

Very interesting! I hadn't thought of that! My theory was to solve this conundrum, that when He said "till all be fulfilled". this was referring to until His messiahship was revealed, when Peter gave his declaration of faith. Yours works just as good, maybe better.

 

[Brian2]

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with my point, which was that there is no such thing as imputed righteousness.

Well Abraham was called righteous because he believed God. That seems to mean that God imputed righteousness to Abraham because of his faith.
If we look further at the scriptures we can see:
Jeremiah 23:5 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
“when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch,
a King who will reign wisely
and do what is just and right in the land.
6 In his days Judah will be saved
and Israel will live in safety.
This is the name by which he will be called:
The LORD Our Righteous Savior.

So because of the righteous Branch of David we receive God's righteousness.

The Christian faith says that Gentile Christians are children of Abraham because of this righteousness that we receive through faith, as he did, an imputed righteousness.

 

[Brian2]

The Messianic age does not go on forever. It is followed by the end of the earth as we know it, the resurrection, and the world to come.

Yes, the messiah is important in that he is the king during the messianic era. But he is less important than the era in terms of how much of the Torah is devoted to him.

There is no Messiah ben Joseph. The only people who talk about this are Christians. The messiah is NOT the suffering servant.

There is no teaching in the Tanakh that we must believe in the Messiah in order to obtain eternal life.

I suppose it could be said that Messianic Age does not go on forever.
But from a Christian pov the judge is going to be Jesus and the one who resurrects everyone is going to be Jesus and the one sitting on the throne of David forever is going to be Jesus.

Ezekiel 37:23They will no longer defile themselves with their idols or detestable images, or with any of their transgressions. I will save them from all their apostasies by which they sinned, and I will cleanse them. Then they will be My people, and I will be their God. 24My servant David will be king over them, and there will be one shepherd for all of them. They will follow My ordinances and keep and observe My statutes. 25They will live in the land that I gave to My servant Jacob, where your fathers lived. They will live there forever with their children and grandchildren, and My servant David will be their prince forever.…

This servant David is seen as the Messiah Jesus, the one who is the Son and is given the nations and who will rule over them (Ps 2) the one whom God appoints as His firstborn (Ps 89:27), the child whom God has given (Isa 9:6,7) who rules on David's throne forever.
So for Christians the Messiah's importance goes on forever along with His kingship.
I suppose since the Jews don't believe the Gospels then the Jews don't realise just how important the Messiah is for the Jews and for Gentiles also and how much of theTorah is devoted to Him.
The Gentiles turn to Him also and He is the light and salvation for the Gentiles. (Isa 49:6)
The one who bears our sins and whom God makes a sin offering. (Isa 53:10), the one whom God appointed to be a covenant for the people and a light to the nations. (Isa 42:6)
But of course the Jews know what those scriptures mean and they could not have any other meaning.
I can't think of anywhere it says that you must believe in the Messiah to obtain eternal life.
Even Jesus said that the scriptures said to keep the commandments to gain eternal life.
Great so keep the commandments as best you can, but remember that the scriptures say that the righteous shall live by faith.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Well Abraham was called righteous because he believed God. That seems to mean that God imputed righteousness to Abraham because of his faith.
If we look further at the scriptures we can see:
Jeremiah 23:5 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
“when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch,
a King who will reign wisely
and do what is just and right in the land.
6 In his days Judah will be saved
and Israel will live in safety.
This is the name by which he will be called:
The LORD Our Righteous Savior.

So because of the righteous Branch of David we receive God's righteousness.

The Christian faith says that Gentile Christians are children of Abraham because of this righteousness that we receive through faith, as he did, an imputed righteousness.

Abraham was righteous because his trust in God resulted in obedience.

Not really sure what your scripture quote has to do with my point. You are creating a reputation for giving answers that make no sense.

 

[Brian2]

Abraham was righteous because his trust in God resulted in obedience.

Not really sure what your scripture quote has to do with my point. You are creating a reputation for giving answers that make no sense.

That is the same in the Christian faith. We are given righteousness because of our faith and that faith is a dead faith unless it results in works of love and faithfulness.
Abraham's works showed his faith in God and what He had said. He circumcised, he would have sacrificed Isaac, he got rid of Ishmael. These were works of faith.

Sorry about my quote, I did not read what it said, but just trusted my memory. Here is what I see as a better translation from the Tanakh and hopefully you can see that if the Lord is our righteousness, that is imputed righteousness.
Jeremiah 23:5 Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, when I will set up of David a righteous shoot, and he shall reign a king and prosper, and he shall perform judgment and righteousness in the land.
6In his days, Judah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell safely, and this is his name that he shall be called, The Lord is our righteousness.

 

[Sedim Haba]

You did forget this:

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

When shall it be fullfilled? The answer is this:

30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. John 19:30

So before Jesus death, all had to follow the laws in the Torah. After Jesus death christians do not have to follow the laws in the Torah.

You really feel you have the right to change Yeshua's words to fit your doctrine?

"...it be fullfilled?" IT? Is that what Matthew 5:18 says? Let's look...

biblehub.com/matthew/5-18.htm

Matthew 5:18 For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Seems that not one translation says "it". IT - singular, ALL - everything. Very different meanings.

Now, I don't consider John as scripture, but Matthew does not say what Yeshua said on the cross.

But, let's look at John 19:30 anyways...

biblehub.com/john/19-30.htm

John 19:30 When Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished." And bowing His head, He yielded up His spirit.

Well, look at that. Only one translation of 27 has him saying "All is finished" He said "IT is finished"

Do you want to know what was finished on the cross? Of course you won't. But others may, so I'll explain.

What was finished, completed, was Messiah ben Yosef, the 'Suffering Servant' of Isaiah 53

Next comes Messiah ben David, the 'King Messiah'. That certainly has yet to happen, so no, ALL has NOT.

 

[Sedim Haba]

Very interesting! I hadn't thought of that! My theory was to solve this conundrum, that when He said "till all be fulfilled". this was referring to until His messiahship was revealed, when Peter gave his declaration of faith. Yours works just as good, maybe better.

Actually, no it doesn't.

There's a whole list of messianic prophecies not yet fulfilled. Read my reply above.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

That is the same in the Christian faith. We are given righteousness because of our faith and that faith is a dead faith unless it results in works of love and faithfulness.
Abraham's works showed his faith in God and what He had said. He circumcised, he would have sacrificed Isaac, he got rid of Ishmael. These were works of faith.

Sorry about my quote, I did not read what it said, but just trusted my memory. Here is what I see as a better translation from the Tanakh and hopefully you can see that if the Lord is our righteousness, that is imputed righteousness.
Jeremiah 23:5 Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, when I will set up of David a righteous shoot, and he shall reign a king and prosper, and he shall perform judgment and righteousness in the land.
6In his days, Judah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell safely, and this is his name that he shall be called, The Lord is our righteousness.

My point is that there is no such thing as imputed righteousness. Again, your quote has no relationship to my point. I'm ending the conversation because it has no logical flow.

 

[Brian2]

My point is that there is no such thing as imputed righteousness. Again, your quote has no relationship to my point. I'm ending the conversation because it has no logical flow.

I spoke with a Jew once who told me there is no atonement in Judaism even though there is the day of atonement in the Jewish feast days.
This seems to be a similar situation where there is obviously imputation of righteousness in the Jewish scriptures but a denial in Judaism that it is there.

 

[Brian2]

Thought it was obvious from these posts:

Ah, well.

I have heard that there was a time when the knowledge of ancient Hebrew was on the decline and there was danger of losing that knowledge amongst Jews. Then the Masoretes decided at re-establish the knowledge and what the Hebrew scriptures could mean.
In a language and set of scriptures with ambiguity as to the meaning in places, the Masoretes developed a system, using the oral tradition for the meaning of the scriptures, where vowels and consonants and pauses and grammar was less ambiguous and all the Jews would know what any passage meant.
Some people say that this has been a source of some differences between the Tanakh and Old Testament and the Masoretes firmed up ambiguities in the direction of the meanings that the Jews had accepted, even though not all those understanding may have been right.
It seems there there are differences in readings between the MT and the Old Testament in many places that the Christians say are prophecies about the Messiah and Jews do not.
This it seems has firmed up differences in understanding and meant that the prophecies about Jesus are less likely to be seen in the MT.
I hope you could follow that.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I have heard that there was a time when the knowledge of ancient Hebrew was on the decline and there was danger of losing that knowledge amongst Jews. Then the Masoretes decided at re-establish the knowledge and what the Hebrew scriptures could mean.
In a language and set of scriptures with ambiguity as to the meaning in places, the Masoretes developed a system, using the oral tradition for the meaning of the scriptures, where vowels and consonants and pauses and grammar was less ambiguous and all the Jews would know what any passage meant.
Some people say that this has been a source of some differences between the Tanakh and Old Testament and the Masoretes firmed up ambiguities in the direction of the meanings that the Jews had accepted, even though not all those understanding may have been right.
It seems there there are differences in readings between the MT and the Old Testament in many places that the Christians say are prophecies about the Messiah and Jews do not.
This it seems has firmed up differences in understanding and meant that the prophecies about Jesus are less likely to be seen in the MT.
I hope you could follow that.

Actually the reason Christian translations are so different in some places (including places where Chrisitans mistakenly think there are messianic prophecies) is due to the fact that almost all Christian translations use a Greek translation called the Septuagint as a source, rather than the Hebrew Text. All translations are inferior, but the Septuagint in particular deviates significantly in certain places. One famous difference is that the Hebrew says a young woman has conceived, and the Septuagint says a virgin will conceive.

 

[Harel13]

I have heard that there was a time when the knowledge of ancient Hebrew was on the decline and there was danger of losing that knowledge amongst Jews. Then the Masoretes decided at re-establish the knowledge and what the Hebrew scriptures could mean.
In a language and set of scriptures with ambiguity as to the meaning in places, the Masoretes developed a system, using the oral tradition for the meaning of the scriptures, where vowels and consonants and pauses and grammar was less ambiguous and all the Jews would know what any passage meant.
Some people say that this has been a source of some differences between the Tanakh and Old Testament and the Masoretes firmed up ambiguities in the direction of the meanings that the Jews had accepted, even though not all those understanding may have been right.
It seems there there are differences in readings between the MT and the Old Testament in many places that the Christians say are prophecies about the Messiah and Jews do not.
This it seems has firmed up differences in understanding and meant that the prophecies about Jesus are less likely to be seen in the MT.
I hope you could follow that.

I followed, but what you described as the supposed history of the MT is incorrect. If I were a literary critic, I would say what you described here is the mythos of the Masoretes (alliteration is awesome) and more akin to a (purposefully) exaggerated praise that the Talmud bestowed upon Shimon ben Shetach when he removed the Sadducees from the Sanhedrin in the time of King Alexander Jannaeus. He is described as having restored the entire Torah from oblivion.

No, the history of the MT goes way back before the Masoretes. The Masoretes were a group of scribes that circa the 8th-11th centuries. They developed the vowel point system and were the latest group of scribes to work at creating a unified version of the Tanach, that much is true. But scribal movements existed for many centuries before them, at least from the time of Ezra (as most academics hold) if not further back (as a minority hold, as well as religious Jews). The same goes for the text. It's old, there were variations (and still are, to a significantly lesser extent), but none of the recorded variations are as significant as the difference between it and the LXX.

What you say about the MT being the cause of the difference in interpretation of the text between Christians and Jews strikes me as you not being knowledgeable in the differences (correct me if I'm wrong). The differences are significant, but not so significant that any average Joe could read the LXX and see prophecies everywhere and then read the MT and not see any prophecies, or vice versa. I would say that most differences are actually minute in the grand scheme, but they are significant when you dive in deep.

 

[rosends]

I spoke with a Jew once who told me there is no atonement in Judaism even though there is the day of atonement in the Jewish feast days.
This seems to be a similar situation where there is obviously imputation of righteousness in the Jewish scriptures but a denial in Judaism that it is there.

That Jew was wrong or you misunderstood something. There is atonement in Judaism.

 

[Rival]

Actually the reason Christian translations are so different in some places (including places where Chrisitans mistakenly think there are messianic prophecies) is due to the fact that almost all Christian translations use a Greek translation called the Septuagint as a source, rather than the Hebrew Text. All translations are inferior, but the Septuagint in particular deviates significantly in certain places. One famous difference is that the Hebrew says a young woman has conceived, and the Septuagint says a virgin will conceive.

I'm not sure where you've read this but it isn't true.

Since the Authorised 1611 version, and even some before, most Christian Bibles in the West use the Masoretic Text, and some, such as the RSV and NRSV, put 'young woman', not virgin. Most Bibles make a point of saying which texts they translate from, and I'd say nearly 100% use the Masoretic Text, backed up in cases of variant readings etc. by an LXX. These LXX translations are generally noted in margins and footnotes.

 

[Rival]

I'm not sure where you've read this but it isn't true.

Since the Authorised 1611 version, and even some before, most Christian Bibles in the West use the Masoretic Text, and some, such as the RSV and NRSV, put 'young woman', not virgin. Most Bibles make a point of saying which texts they translate from, and I'd say nearly 100% use the Masoretic Text, backed up in cases of variant readings etc. by an LXX. These LXX translations are generally noted in margins and footnotes.

To add,

"The Masoretic Text is used as the basis for most Protestant translations of the Old Testament such as the King James Version, English Standard Version, New American Standard Version, and New International Version. After 1943, it is also used for some versions of Catholic Bibles, such as the New American Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible. Some Christian denominations instead prefer translations of the Septuagint as it matches quotations in the New Testament, especially by Paul the Apostle.[6]"

Many Catholics use Catholic Editions ('CE') of Bibles translated by Protestants, good examples being the RSV and NRSV, which are used in the service readings in the UK; in the US it tends to be the NAB. These Bibles have the MT as their basis + the Deuterocanon from other sources. The only Bible I can think of that's in wide circulation that uses an LXX is the Orthodox Study Bible. Most Catholics these days are not using the Douay or Confraternity texts.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I'm not sure where you've read this but it isn't true.

Since the Authorised 1611 version, and even some before, most Christian Bibles in the West use the Masoretic Text, and some, such as the RSV and NRSV, put 'young woman', not virgin. Most Bibles make a point of saying which texts they translate from, and I'd say nearly 100% use the Masoretic Text, backed up in cases of variant readings etc. by an LXX. These LXX translations are generally noted in margins and footnotes.

They do not use the Masoretic text alone. The opt for the LXX when it suits them.

 

[Rival]

They do not use the Masoretic text alone. The opt for the LXX when it suits them.

Yes, as I said they use it to supplement the text where they see what they consider scribal errors etc. These are all noted, so you can look them up.

 

[paarsurrey]

Er, because Christians do not believe it is perfect, or at any rate, that it is not a complete expression of what God intends for Man, perhaps?

Did Jesus himself say it, please that Moses teachings were imperfect, please?
If yes, then kindly quote from Jesus own writing in first person. Right?

Regards