Drew
Member
Good point - I will let the issue drop.Is there a reason why the definitions of "Jew" and "Gentile" are even being discussed? Is it relevant to the discussion? If not, it needs to stop.
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
Good point - I will let the issue drop.Is there a reason why the definitions of "Jew" and "Gentile" are even being discussed? Is it relevant to the discussion? If not, it needs to stop.
Firstly, they were not Romans and they were not Gentiles. I have no idea how you can even argue that.
Secondly, what does this have to do with the topic?? You have another thread for this already.
I am not going to discuss this further unless you can show how it is necessary for this topic.
I may have been a bit hasty, so please don't drop it altogether, unless you aren't interested in pursuing it. There is a thread here: http://www.christianforums.net/showthread.php?t=41255Good point - I will let the issue drop.
Drew said:1. The term "Gentile" denotes a person who is not a member of the 12 tribes - if you are not a member of the 12 tribes, you are a Gentile;
2. While the term "Jew" can be used to refer specifically to a member of the tribe of Judah, it is very often (e.g. by Paul) used to refer to a person who is a member of the 12 tribes;
3. One can, of course, be born as a "gentile".
Drew said:From wikipedia (I added the emphasis):
The term Gentile (from Latin gentilis, by the French "gentil", female: "gentille", meaning of or belonging to a clan or tribe) refers to non-Israelite peoples or nations in English translations of the Bible. Latin and subsequently English translators selectively used the term gentiles when the context for the base term "peoples" or "nations", Hebrew, גוי (goy) and נכרי (nokhri) in the Hebrew Bible and the Greek word ἔθνη (éthnē) in the New Testament, indicated non-Israelite peoples or nations. The term gentiles is derived from Latin, used for contextual translation, and not an original Hebrew or Greek word from the Bible. Following Christianization of the Roman Empire, the general implication of the word gentile became "non-Jew".
Actually the reference I was making is found in Romans 3...my bad.I agree with everything you write here except the Galatians 3 bit. I believe that "law" in Galatians 3 is a reference to the Law of Moses, not to some universal law.
Nevertheless, I entirely agree with your principal point.
Paul is certainly not saying that we, or anybody, should follow the Law of Moses. While what Paul is really saying here is difficult to determine, we can be sure that he is not saying that the Law of Moses remains in force. He is quite clear at numerous other places in his letters - the written code of the Law of Moses has been set aside.
All of the law, what is called Moses law, ceremonial and that of the priesthood was taken away. I am willing to discuss this with anyone in the one-on-one forum.
Its not this simple.Kinda puts him at odds with Christ and John...
Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For 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. 19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven
The author of 1 John is not saying that the Law of Moses is still in effect - that would contradict the clear teaching of Paul on this matter. Here is the text from the NASB;Let me get a gun, rob your house and rape your wife and see if that is perfectly acceptable since there is no law. After all, if the law is taken away, it is not sin, for sin is...
1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
The author of 1 John is not saying that the Law of Moses is still in effect - that would contradict the clear teaching of Paul on this matter. Here is the text from the NASB;
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness
Note that this certainly does not appear to be a specific reference to the Law of Moses, but rather is a reference to "lawlessness" in general. So what the writer is saying here really does not strengthen any argument that the Law of Moses continues to be in force.
It (the Law of Moses) rather clearly is not in force anymore, as Paul asserts here in Ephesians 2:
For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the [l]barrier of the dividing wall, 15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, 16 and might (reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross,....
People will try to make the case that Paul is not speaking of the Law of Moses here. But that cannot really work precisely because it is clearly the Law of Moses, which was for Jews only, that functions to separate Jew from Gentile.
And it is therefore through its abolition that any special status for Jews, which for them was wrapped up in the ethnic specificity of the Law of Moses, is doany away with.
Hi I Just read an article title ''should Christians love the wicked'' and it had some info about the law.
I'll try and explain with Bible verses as best I can.
Matthew 19:16-19:
16And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Matthew 22:36-39:
36Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38This is the first and great commandment.
39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Matthew 22 deals with the Ten commandments - Jesus puts more emphasis on the commandments relating to men
v 39 - Is not a new commandment.
In Matthew 19 Jesus states some of the Ten commandments - obviously they are not taken away.
Exodus 20:12-17:12Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
13Thou shalt not kill.
14Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15Thou shalt not steal.
16Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
17Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
If you don't love your neighbor - you cannot fulfill these commandments - can you?
1 John 2:3-4:3And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
Galatians 3:12:And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
Galatians 5:14:For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Romans 13:8-10:
8Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
Hi, good post! Very True also. There are two tables of the Covenant. (two tables of stone in ) See if you can find what the Love to God ones are, and then our duty to all mankind? Read the First four & then read the last six. Yet over in James 2:8-12 we see in verse 10 that when any one is knowingly broken ALL are Broken.
Deut. 5
[22] These words the LORD spake unto all your assembly in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud, and of the thick darkness, with a great voice: and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.
[23] And it came to pass, when ye heard the voice out of the midst of the darkness, (for the mountain did burn with fire,) that ye came near unto me, even all the heads of your tribes, and your elders; ...
--Elijah
At the time Jesus uttered those words, the Law was indeed still in force. But that does not mean that the Law remained in force after His death and resurrection.In Matthew 19 Jesus states some of the Ten commandments - obviously they are not taken away.
So it is in that sense that the first covenant was only for the Israelites. The world was not condemned by Mosaic laws about worship during the time of the law. The Israelites were. But the world was condemned by moral laws...whether they actually knew about them in the law of Moses or not.
Mat 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For 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. 19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven
Its not this simple.
Jesus was a product of his times and culture and I suggest that we in the modern west have been a little careless in understanding the implications of this. On a surface reading, Matthew 5:18 is indeed a challenge to those of us who think that, at least in a certain specific sense, the Law of Moses has been retired. Those who hold the opposing view have their own challenges to face, such as Ephesians 2:15 (and Romans 7) which, to me, unambiguously declare the abolition of the Law of Moses, at least in terms of “rules and regulationsâ€.
I think that there is a way to faithfully read this text and still claim that Law of Moses was retired 2000 years ago as Paul seems to so forcefully argue that it was (e.g. Eph 2:15). My proposal hinges on the assertion that in Hebrew culture apocalyptic “end of the world†language was commonly used in a specifically metaphorical mode for the specific purposes of investing commonplace events with their theological significance.
I would appeal to the phrase “until all is accomplished†and point the reader to Jesus’ proclamation that “It is accomplished!†as He breathed His last on the Cross. Perhaps this is what Jesus is referring to. I believe that seeing it that way allows us to take Paul at his word in his many statements which clearly denote the work of Jesus as the point in time at which Law of Moses was retired.
1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
The author of 1 John is not saying that the Law of Moses is still in effect - that would contradict the clear teaching of Paul on this matter. Here is the text from the NASB;
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness
Note that this certainly does not appear to be a specific reference to the Law of Moses, but rather is a reference to "lawlessness" in general. So what the writer is saying here really does not strengthen any argument that the Law of Moses continues to be in force.
It (the Law of Moses) rather clearly is not in force anymore, as Paul asserts here in Ephesians 2:
People will try to make the case that Paul is not speaking of the Law of Moses here. But that cannot really work precisely because it is clearly the Law of Moses, which was for Jews only, that functions to separate Jew from Gentile.
And it is therefore through its abolition that any special status for Jews, which for them was wrapped up in the ethnic specificity of the Law of Moses, is doany away with.
I believe it is absolutely critical to try read these words through the eyes of a first century Jew, not the eyes of a 21st century westerner. Jesus lived, ministered, and spoke within a cultural setting vastly different from the 21st western setting.