Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
By Network Minister
M. Tichi
Written: 3-12-2008
Excerpts from Wikipedia
Maimonides
(1135–1204), Jewish philosopher and rabbinic scholar, born in
Spain; born Moses ben Maimon. His Guide for the Perplexed
(1190) attempts to reconcile Talmudic scripture with the
philosophy of Aristotle.
Note: "The Law(s)" written by YHVH through Moses are far more
than the 613 Mitzvot, or the "Ten Commandments." To follow them
by "The Letter" of "The Law" rather than "The Intent" is called
legalism. Legalism is something YHVH never intended for HIS laws.
Deuteronomy 12:32
What thing soever I (YHVH) command you, observe to do it: thou
shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
The Five Principles of Phariseeism (according to Nehemiah
Gordon)
Mark 15:28
And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered
with the transgressors.
Luke 22:37
For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished
in me, And he was reckoned amongst the transgressors: for the things
concerning me have an end.
Acts 2:23
Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge
of YHVH, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and
slain:
1 Corinthians 9:21
To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law
to YHVH, but under "The Law" to Messiah,) that I might gain them
that are without law.
1 Timothy 1:9
Knowing this, that "The Law" is not made for a righteous man, but for
the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for
unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of
mothers, for manslayers,
2 Peter 2:8
(For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing,
vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;)
“In theology, is the idea that members of a particular religious group are
under no obligation to obey the laws of ethics or morality as presented by
religious authorities. Antinomianism is the polar opposite of legalism,
which is the notion that obedience to a code of (Jewish) religious law is
necessary for salvation.” However, Christianity has unwittingly created their
own set of rules for salvation (aka "The Roman Road to Salvation").
The two different types of law described in the Tanakh are The Mosaic Law
and The Davidic Law. The Mosaic Law being the vows themselves, and
Davidic being the intention behind the vows (which we know and teach as
SELF-less love).
Christianity states that, Paul of Tarsus, in his Letters, claims several times
that believers are saved by the unearned grace of YHVH, and not by our
own good works, "lest anyone should boast", and placed emphasis on
orthodoxy (right belief) rather than orthopraxy (right practice). However, we
know this to be untrue, as Paul himself upheld the Spirit of "The Law". No
one saved by YHWH should boast because the Spirit was gifted even though
it was undeserved, not because of a lack or abundance of good works. The
soteriology (the study of salvation) of Paul's statements in this matter has
always been a matter of dispute; the ancient Gnostics interpreted Paul to be
referring to the manner in which embarking on a path to enlightenment
ultimately leads to enlightenment, which was their idea of what constituted
salvation. In what has become the modern mainstream Christian orthodoxy,
however, this is interpreted as a reference to salvation simply by believing
that Christianity is valid (it is NOT); Christianity is antinomianism in its most
impure form. See also New Perspective on Paul.
Paul used the term freedom in Messiah, for example, Galatians 2:4, and it is
clear that some (mistakenly) understood this to mean lawlessness (i.e. not
obeying Mosaic Law). For example, in Acts 18:12-16 Paul is accused of
"persuading .. people to worship YHVH in ways contrary to "The Law"" and
in Acts 21:21 .
James "The Just" explained his situation to Paul:
"They have been told about you that you teach all the Jews living
among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, and that you tell them not to
circumcise their children or observe the customs." (NRSV).
Even so, he does go on to say that sins remain sins, and upholds by several
examples the kind of behavior that their opinion the church should not
tolerate. For example, in 1 Corinthians 7:10-16 he cites Y'Shua's teaching
on divorce ("not I but the Lord") and does not reject it, but goes on to
proclaim his own teaching ("I, not the Lord"), an extended counsel
regarding a specific situation which some interpret as not in conflict with
what the Lord said.
The Epistle of James, in contrast, states that our good works justify before
men our faith after salvation and we are to obey "The Law" of YHWH,
that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone, that faith
without works is dead (James 2:14–26). Historically, the presence of this
statement has been difficult for Protestants to rectify with their belief in
salvation by faith alone. Martin Luther even suggested that the Epistle
might be a forgery, and relegated it to an appendix in his Bible (although he
later came to accept its canonicity).
Note: Faith without works is dead, just as works without faith
are dead, they go hand in hand, and must not be separated.
The Torah prescribes the death penalty for desecrating the Sabbath by
working (Exodus 31:14-17). To avoid any possibility of breaking the Torah
commands, the Pharisees formulated strict interpretations and numerous
traditions which they treated as laws, see Halakha. Y'Shua criticized the
Pharisees for this (Mark 7:7-9). The Jewish Encyclopedia article on Y'Shua
notes: "Y'Shua, however, does not appear to have taken into account the
fact that the Halakah was at this period just becoming crystallized, and
that much variation existed as to its definite form; the disputes of the Bet
Hillel and Bet Shammai were occurring about the time of his maturity."
In the Gospel of Mark, Y'Shua's disciples were picking grain for food on a
Sabbath (Mark 2:23-28). When the Pharisees challenged Y'Shua over
this, he pointed to Biblical precedent and declared that "the Sabbath was
made for man, not man for the Sabbath". Some claim Y'Shua rejected
complete adherence to the Torah. Most scholars hold that Y'Shua did not
reject "The Law", but directed that it should be obeyed in context. e.g., E.
P. Sanders notes: ". . . no substantial conflict between Y'Shua and the
Pharisees with regard to Sabbath, food, and purity laws. ... The church
took some while to come to the position that the Sabbath need not be kept,
and it is hard to think that Y'Shua explicitly said so."
Workers of lawlessness
It is interesting to take note of the conflict between those that keep "The
Law", and those who do not with respect to their individual beginnings.
Early Judaism, by making the laws stricter, was ADDING to "The
Law", while Early Christians, by making "The Law" void were
TAKING away from "The Law". Had either of these religions been left in
the pristine original form, we would have neither Christianity
(christopaganism) nor modern Judaism (Phariseeism); however, both deviate
from the INTENT of "The Law" itself.
Ezekiel 40:4
And the man said unto me, Son of man, behold with thine (Spiritual)
eyes, and hear with thine (Spiritual) ears, and set thine heart
(innermost thoughts) upon all that I shall shew thee; for to the intent
that I might shew them unto thee art thou brought hither: declare all
that thou seest to the house of Israel.
Hebrews 4:12
For the word of YHVH is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any
twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and
spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts
and intents of the heart.
Those that don't understand the "Intent of the Law" either don't want to
understand it (they have no desire to), or they think that they know better than
YHVH. They have no excuses, as these things are clearly understood and
seen. Mankind has been given all he needs to grasp this simple concept;
even without a witness, preacher or teacher.
Romans 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are
clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his
eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
The INTENTION of "The Law" is far different; in fact, "The Law" isn't even
LAW, per se, but a covenant or vow one makes with YHVH. It's an
agreement. You agree willfully to follow HIS commandments to the best of
your ability because you love HIM (and you don't expect anything in return
– not for salvation's sake, but for LOVE’s sake). This is no different than
what one agrees to in a marriage agreement. This is righteous and SELF-
less. The whole of "The Law" is based upon RIGHTEOUSNESS.
Matthew 22:34-40
34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to
silence, they were gathered together.
35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question,
tempting him, and saying,
36 Master, which is the great commandment in "The Law"?
37 Y'Shua said unto him, Thou shalt LOVE YHVH with all thy heart,
and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt LOVE thy neighbor as
thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all of "The Law" and the
prophets.
Indeed, all "The Law" and the prophets are based on an "INTENT of
LOVE". This is why we profess that all of "The Commandments" are not
laws at all, but "The Words of A Marriage Vow" or "Covenant of Love"
with YHVH; for YHVH seeks an obedient and faithful bride