Question for Patriot Mom

[Sandune]

Since you have chosen to follow Mosaic Law, how do you atone for sin? This is a question I have wondered about the Jewish religion. After the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, there have not been a blood sacrifice offered for sin atonement, to my knowledge. I know that there are Jews of Sumaritan ancestry who still offer burnt offerings but they are in the minority.

[Patriot Mom]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sandune:
Since you have chosen to follow Mosaic Law, how do you atone for sin? This is a question I have wondered about the Jewish religion. After the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, there have not been a blood sacrifice offered for sin atonement, to my knowledge. I know that there are Jews of Sumaritan ancestry who still offer burnt offerings but they are in the minority.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, first, I have not "chosen" to follow Mosaic Law. If one wishes to follow the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob, then they are joineds together with God under one of two covenants. If you are born a Jew, then you are automatically joined to God under the Mosaic covenant. If you are not a Jew, you are joined to God under the Noachic covenant. As God entered into successive covenantal relationships with His people, His prior covenants were NEVER done away with. Each successive covenant enhanced the prior one, each covenant contained more actions that were either commanded to do or prohibited from doing. Unfortunately, we have all been fooled by Rome and their "rewriting" of the Scripture given to Moses by God, into thinking that the "new covenant" mentioned in Jeremiah "wiped out" the previous covenant. I don't know about you, but I don't think that God makes mistakes and would make such a big mistake of entering into a contract with His own people, knowing that they could not fulfill their end of the contract. Since I was not born a Jew, I am under the covenant of Noah. There are seven basic laws; the prohibition of idolatry, blasphemy, murder, sexual immorality, theft, eating a limb from a live animal(kill it and drain the blood first), and the requirement of establishing courts of justice. There are 66 additional laws that fall under these seven categories. They basically give us an idea of how to keep the 7 commandments.

If you are born a Jew, or if you accepted the 10 Commandments at Mt. Sinai, then you are placing yourself under the covenant of Moses. Under this covenant, there are 613 laws that basically give you an idea of how to keep the 10 Commandments.

If you are not born a Jew, you may still keep many of the 613 commandments of the Mosaic covenant. In fact there are numerous instances of this in the Torah. Anytime you see the phrase "the stranger among you", it means those people who were not born under the tribes of Judah or Benjamin, but who went on to accept and live under the Covenant of Moses. At the Exodus from Egypt, many Egyptians rejected their state religion and left with the Israelites to worship and follow God. They were "converts" just like Abraham.

The "new covenant" mentioned in Jeremiah is not in existance at this present time. Think about it. It says "My Torah will be written on their hearts". First, it is a messianic age prophesy. It means that everyone will know the Torah and keep all the 613 commandments therein. Christians have rejected God's Torah as inapplicable to them. They claim that Jesus as a sacrifice (human?) abolished the Torah of "legalisms" and now they live under a covenant of "grace". Hate to tell you folks, but ALL PRIOR covenants, including the Mosaic, INCLUDED GRACE! Anyway, if Jesus abolished the covenant of Moses, then ALL 10 COMMANDMENTS WOULD BE ABOLISHED TOO, as the 10 commandments are written in the covenant of Moses!

Now for the method of atonement for sin. First of all, there was about 40 years +/- between the crucifiction of Jesus by the Romans and the destruction of the Temple by the Romans. Sacrifices were offered in the Temple daily during this time. Three sacrifices were offered each day, morning, afternoon and evening; and when the fat and the innards were burned, the priests ate the meat, nothing was wasted. Oftentimes, people who could not afford the sin sacrifice and peace offering could bring in birds for sacrifice. There was also a grain offering, so many times no blood was shed for atonement. This existed from the first day the Israelites entered into the Promised Land and began making their sacred offerings and sacrifices.

So, for 40 years after the "ultimate sacrifice", sin offerings were STILL being accepted in the Temple. Paul, in Acts 21 STILL is making blood atonement in the Temple 30 years AFTER Jesus' death! I know, I'm getting off track...Back to the method of atonement. If you go to your TaNaKh and find Numbers 5:6-7, you will see that the method of atonement is "confess, repent and restore." This is in addition to the yearly Yom Kippur bull offering. This method of atonement existed long before the entrance into the Promised Land before they had a Temple, and it exists now that there is no longer a Temple. So, the atonement for sin is confession of your sins to your brother, repentance of those sins before your brother and before God and charity. This is only the basic definitions I can give you. There is so much more to it than what I have explained, but to explain it all would take me pages and probably a whole day. I don't know where you are at spiritually and scholastically in regards to your faith and what you are seeking, so it's hard to explain without rehashing something you already know or not including something that you don't know about. It all depends on whether you believe the roots of Christianity are Judaic.

[RevJoel]

Dear PM...in your post you mention, "Unfortunately, we have all been fooled by Rome and their "rewriting" of the Scripture given to Moses by God, into thinking that the "new covenant" mentioned in Jeremiah "wiped out" the previous covenant."

I know you have strong convictions in this matter, but I must ask to rein in your tone. The way you write and set in quotes "rewriting" is as though you are slapping the face of every Christian that believes in the Sacrifice of Lord Jesus as our Savior. You have your beliefs; we have ours. Those beliefs have a common root and we must treat each other civily. Your post often take the tone of "I am the only one that has it right". I ask you to tone it down. You may have your opinion, and I will have mine. I would not say that you are in serious error because of your belief, and I would expect to keep the same courtesy from you. We must agree to disagree on this.

Pax Christi
Rev. Joel+

[Patriot Mom]

RJ, I'm just responding to a PERSONAL question from Sandune. I was talking ONLY to Sandune, no one else. Unless Sandune posted this question in a mocking or confrontational tone WHICH I HIGHLY DOUBT then no one else would have posted a reply. Obviously he had a valid question of me or he never would have asked.

Perhaps the next time someone asks me how my faith fits into the faith that Jesus practiced, which was Biblical Judaism, then either I will ignore that person or I'll just respond with lies.

[gconan]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patriot Mom:
Each successive covenant enhanced the prior one, each covenant contained more actions that were either commanded to do or prohibited from doing. Unfortunately, we have all been fooled by Rome and their "rewriting" of the Scripture given to Moses by God, into thinking that the "new covenant" mentioned in Jeremiah "wiped out" the previous covenant.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


2 Corinthians 3 http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/b...on&showxref=on

Ministers of a New Covenant

1 Are we beginning to (1) commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some, (2) letters of commendation
to you or from you?
2 (3) You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men;
3 being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, (4) cared for by us, written not with ink but with the
Spirit of (5) the living God, not on (6) tablets of stone but on (7) tablets of (8) human hearts.
4 Such (9) confidence we have through Christ toward God.
5 Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as coming from ourselves, but (10) our
adequacy is from God,
6 who also made us adequate as (11) servants of a (12) new covenant, not of (13) the letter but of the
Spirit; for the letter kills, but (14) the Spirit gives life.
7 But if the (15) ministry of death, (16) in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, (17) so that the
sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was,
8 how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?
9 For if (18) the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the (19) ministry of righteousness
abound in glory.
10 For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses it.
11 For if that which fades away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.
12 (20) Therefore having such a hope, (21) we use great boldness in our speech,
13 and are not like Moses, (22) who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not
look intently at the end of what was fading away.
14 But their minds were (23) hardened; for until this very day at the (24) reading of (25) the old covenant
the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ.
15 But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart;
16 (26) but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.
17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where (27) the Spirit of the Lord is, (28) there is liberty.
18 But we all, with unveiled face, (29) beholding as in a mirror the (30) glory of the Lord, are being (31)
transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from (32) the Lord, the Spirit.


Show cross-references

1.2 Cor 5:12; 10:12, 18; 12:11
2.Acts 18:27; 1 Cor 16:3
3.1 Cor 9:2
4.2 Cor 3:6
5.Matt 16:16
6.Ex 24:12; 31:18; 32:15f; 2 Cor 3:7
7.Prov 3:3; 7:3; Jer 17:1
8.Jer 31:33; Ezek 11:19; 36:26
9.Eph 3:12
10.1 Cor 15:10
11.1 Cor 3:5
12.Jer 31:31; Luke 22:20
13.Rom 2:29
14.John 6:63; Rom 7:6
15.Rom 4:15; 5:20; 7:5f; 2 Cor 3:9; Gal 3:10, 21f
16.Ex 24:12; 31:18; 32:15f; 2 Cor 3:3
17.Ex 34:29-35; 2 Cor 3:13
18.Deut 27:26; 2 Cor 3:7; Heb 12:18-21
19.Rom 1:17; 3:21f
20.2 Cor 7:4
21.Acts 4:13, 29; 2 Cor 7:4; Eph 6:19; 1 Thess 2:2
22.Ex 34:33-35; 2 Cor 3:7
23.Rom 11:7; 2 Cor 4:4
24.Acts 13:15
25.2 Cor 3:6
26.Ex 34:34; Rom 11:23
27.Is 61:1f; Gal 4:6
28.John 8:32; Gal 5:1, 13
29.1 Cor 13:12
30.John 17:22, 24; 2 Cor 4:4, 6
31.Rom 8:29
32.2 Cor 3:17

[This message has been edited by gconan (edited 28 July 2002).]

[This message has been edited by gconan (edited 28 July 2002).]

[RevJoel]

Dear PM,

In a public forum there is no such thing as a personal answer to personal question. That is what email is all about. If you wish to post comments that are derogatory to the Christian faith on a open board then expect to receive negative comments in return. You may practice your faith by all means; that is one of the foundations of this land, but you will not be permitted to make comments such as "being fooled by Rome" and "rewriting scripture". Lets keep it civil and if you can't then take your personal comments to email.

Pax Christi
Rev. Joel+

[Comrade Andrei]

You must mean how Rome (i.e. the Vatican, the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church founded by Christ) set things straight...

------------------
The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communist Revolution. The Proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Workingmen of all countries, unite!-Karl Marx, "The Communist Manifesto"

I would trust my life to two things-God and the Kalashnikov.

[Patriot Mom]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RevJoel:
Dear PM,

In a public forum there is no such thing as a personal answer to personal question. That is what email is all about. If you wish to post comments that are derogatory to the Christian faith on a open board then expect to receive negative comments in return. You may practice your faith by all means; that is one of the foundations of this land, but you will not be permitted to make comments such as "being fooled by Rome" and "rewriting scripture". Lets keep it civil and if you can't then take your personal comments to email.

Pax Christi
Rev. Joel+ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rev Joel

I believe that I was asked for a personal opinion by Sandune, all I did was answer the question as I understand things. Sandune doesn't have an e-mail address listed, so what am I supposed to do?

Where have I been uncivil? I haven't flamed anyone and I've only posted things that can be easily verified with a little investigation. You accuse me of posting things "derogatory to the Christian faith", yet I've only posted the true teachings of Jesus. Gconan counters the teachings of Jesus with the teaching of Paul. Is Paul the Christ, or Is Jesus the Christ? If Jesus' teachings are too "Jewish", I guess we can always default to Paul, can't we? Are you really Christians (followers of Jesus) or are you "Paulines"?

I really don't want to have any more problems with the BOI. A lot of people have responded positively to my posts but you, Rev Joel, apparently can't come up with words to counter what I say, so you attack me personally. I ask you to look into your heart and ask yourself if you are being truthful to your congregation.

In conclusion: I was asked a question and responded with the only answer I had. My "religion" is no different than the religion of Jesus! If you want to ban me from posting here it will only prove that everything I have posted is true and you cannot debate it.

If anyone wants to see what has been changed, just go to Borders and pick up a TaNaKh (Jewish Scriptures) and compare it word for word with any other Bible. Better yet, go to this site and read the Hebrew Bible translated into English http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
then compare it to the OT in your Bible. Then tell me Rome or the Essenes didn't change it.

God Bless us all, everyone.

[Sandune]

Sorry about not responding right away, I wasn't near a computer all weekend. I wasn't intending on setting you up with a loaded question either. My puzzlement is this, a blood sacrifice has always been a requirement for the atonement of sins even in the beginning with Adam and Eve. You talk about being under the Law of Noah, even he offered a sacrifice. The Noahitic laws you mentioned are also the basis of our Nations 'Christian' foundation of laws. This is something all righteous men automatically know to practice. BTW, I don't consider Noah as my ancessor, he is the ancessor of the Semites.

Well, I have to log off, we're getting a thunderstorm and I need to shut down. Will continue later.

[strmrdr]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patriot Mom:
[B] If you want to ban me from posting here it will only prove that everything I have posted is true and you cannot debate it.

[B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
nope it would just prove we got tired of it.
It comes down to respect we will show your opinions respect but you had better show ours respect also.
We have had this discussion before, a less in your face attitude in your posts is needed.
If you have a question about that drop me an email.



------------------
VERITAS VINCIT

[RevJoel]

My o My, Where do I start?

"Where have I been uncivil? I haven't flamed anyone..."

While your words may be very civil in may post it only takes a moment for them to be derogatory. Words that accuse the Christian faith of being a sham based on some proported "rewriting" surfice on a Christian faith based forum are construed (at least by this mod as a flame).


"You accuse me of posting things "derogatory to the Christian faith", yet I've only posted the true teachings of Jesus."

Nope, 'fraid you do more than post the teaching of Yashuah Messiah. You post your opinion and the opinions of the person or persons that taught you your belief system that the Christian faith is build on deceit and skullduggery. Now posting your opinion is fine and you are welcome to do so at any time, but, couch your statements with, "in my opinion" or "or in the opinion of Rebbi Who-so-ever that devised my faith"...your smart enough to know what I mean here. Don't post opinion as fact and then get upset when others call you on it.

"Gconan counters the teachings of Jesus with the teaching of Paul.

What gets you so bundged up over Paul? True he may have not known Jesus personally, but why whould that be a problem. I have not met Jesus in the flesh, yet. But, I know Him as deeply and personally as I know my wife, my children, my parents... He knows me and I know Him and He is my Lord and Savior. Who are you to say that Jesus could not or would not made Himself know in a personal way to Paul? Jesus is God and He can do what every He will.

Is Paul the Christ, or Is Jesus the Christ?

JESUS IS LORD!!!!!

And Paul, like the original Apostles and the early fathers of the Church, Irenieus, Anthony, Augustine, Constantine, Polycarp, down today to the Pope, the Partiacrh, the Bishops, the Metropolitans the Priest, the Pastors, the servants of the faith proclaim Jesus as Lord, second person of the Trinity, One God in Three, three in one.

If Jesus' teachings are too "Jewish", I guess we can always default to Paul, can't we? Are you really Christians (followers of Jesus) or are you "Paulines"?

There's that "I know something you don't, nahh nahhh nahhhhhh; holier that thou" attitute that we have grown to know and love!

I really don't want to have any more problems with the BOI. A lot of people have responded positively to my posts but you, Rev Joel, apparently can't come up with words to counter what I say, so you attack me personally.

Yes I have certainly attacked you personally! I asked that, on a Christ Centered Forum, that you tone down the viterol that you obviously feel toward Christians. Almost every post you make inclued some smug or reference to the Jewishness of Jesus and how as an Observent Jew He could not have possibly been Messiah. Well the Good News is that Jesus was God before He was Jewish.

I ask you to look into your heart and ask yourself if you are being truthful to your congregation.

My constant prayer is that I never lead my congregation astray. To that end, when I see the fruits of "New" theology foisted and proffered as if it were canon, I pray that the Holy Spirit will kindle in me a word of wisdom, or a word of knowledge with regard to that new "truth". Armed with the guidence of the Holy Spirit and based in the Word of God as reveal in the Old and New Testament of the Holy Bible, I choose my path and the path that I lead on. That path leads to the knowledge that Jesus is Lord, Yashuah is Messiah!

If you want to ban me from posting here it will only prove that everything I have posted is true and...

Not even close!

Pax Christi
Rev. Joel+

[gconan]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patriot Mom:


If anyone wants to see what has been changed, just go to Borders and pick up a TaNaKh (Jewish Scriptures) and compare it word for word with any other Bible. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Patriot Mom
What is your view on the Jewish translators consulting/using the Septuagint in the very Jewish TaNaKh ?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Better yet, go to this site and read the Hebrew Bible translated into English http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
then compare it to the OT in your Bible.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Thanks for the link. This is an older translation than the one @ borders though. How do they compare?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Then tell me Rome or the Essenes didn't change it.

God Bless us all, everyone.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I have heard you say this before? All of our Scripture was written well before Rome or Constantine had any influence or even existed. How could they change it? Although the Essenes were certainly contemporary, there is no evidence what you say. How come top Jewish scholarship does not say this?

[This message has been edited by gconan (edited 30 July 2002).]

[This message has been edited by gconan (edited 30 July 2002).]

[gconan]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Patriot Mom:


Better yet, go to this site and read the Hebrew Bible translated into English http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/et0.htm
then compare it to the OT in your Bible. Then tell me Rome or the Essenes didn't change it.

God Bless us all, everyone.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Very intresting Patriot Mom. It seems the Jewish translators did not mind using a Christian version as the base for their translation.

http://www.bible-researcher.com/versbib10.html

1917. The Holy Scriptures, according to the
Masoretic Text. A New translation with the aid of
previous versions and with constant consultation of
Jewish authorities. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication
Society of America, 1917. A revision of the Old
Testament of the American Standard Version (1901)
by American Jews.

[gconan]

Patriot Mom, here is from the Preface to the JPS 1917 Edition http://www.mechon-mamre.org/e/et/jps1917.htm

We are, it is hardly needful to say, deeply grateful for the works of our non-Jewish predecessors, such as the Authorised Version with its admirable diction, which can never be surpassed, as well as for the Revised Version with its ample learning--but they are not ours. The Editors have not only used these famous English versions, but they have gone back to the earlier translations of Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, the Bishops' Bible, and the Douai Version, which is the authorised English translation of the Vulgate used by the Roman Catholics; in a word, upon doubtful points in style, all English versions have been drawn upon. The renditions of parts of the Hebrew Scriptures by Lowth and others in the eighteenth century and by Cheyne and Driver in our own days were likewise consulted.

In preparing the manuscript for consideration by the Board of Editors, Professor Margolis took into account the existing English versions, the standard commentaries, ancient and modern, the translations already made for the Jewish Publication Society of America, the divergent renderings from the Revised Version prepared for the Jews of England, the marginal notes of the Revised Version, and the changes of the American Committee of Revisers. Due weight was given to the ancient versions as establishing a tradition of interpretation, notably the Septuagint and the versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, the Targums, the Peshitta, the Vulgate, and the Arabic version of Saadya. Talmudic and midrashic allusions and all available Jewish commentators, both the great medieval authorities, like Rashi, Kimhi, and Ibn Ezra, and the moderns S. D. Luzzatto, Malbim, and Ehrlich, as well as all the important non-Jewish commentators, were consulted.