Nazarene Space

From my Hebraic Roots Commentary to Acts at

http://nazarenespace.com/page/books-dvds


15:1  And men came down from Y'hudah and were teaching the brothers, Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of the Torah, you are not able to have Life [eternal].  In Acts 15 we have a halachic issue being settled by the Rosh Beit Din.  In order to understand the proceedings of that meeting and its ruling we must know what the issue was that was before it. In this case Paul's position is not clearly spelled out in the pashat only his opponents' position is clearly spelled out in the pashat.

 

Pauls opponents' position is:

 

"Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of the Torah,

you are not able to have life [eternal]."

 

Now we must ask ourselves: "What are the implications or ramifications of this position?"

 

We have a good model to work from. A similar position is held today by a group called the "Church of Christ" also known as "Campbelites". These teach that a person mut be baptised in order to be saved. This has resulted in adebate between them and other protestants (especially Baptists). The Baptists often pose the situation of a man who beccomes a believer while accross the street from a Church of Christ Church. He immediately runs accross the street to get baptised and is hit by a truck and killed. the baptists point out that this man according to the Church of Christ position would not be saved. Many Church of Christ evangelists run around with keys to their church so that at any time they can go get that baptism immediately, perchance the person dies before an more opertune time comes.

 

This would also be the mindset of Paul's opponents of Acts 15:1. They would believe that that person should become circumcised immedtiately upon becoming a believer perchance they die before doing so.

 

The more traditional view in Judaism differs. The more traditional view is that since circumcision and immersion mark the point at which a person becomes a Jew, that they must learn the Torah first. This is becaue if they are circumcised and become a Jew before learning the 613 commandments of the Torah then they will immediately be violating commandments that they do not know, bringing judgement down upon our whole people (Deut. 28-29 & lev. 26) . The traditional Jewish approach is therefore to teach the new believer the Torah first.

 

Now we can see from the remez what Paul's position is. The opponents are teaching that a person must be circumcised immediatly to be saved and then taught the Torah. Paul was teaching that they should first learn the Torah.

 

15:2 And Paul and Bar Nabba had much strife and dispute with them. And it happened that they sent up Paul and Bar Nabba, and others with them, to the emissaries and elders who were in Yerushalayim, because of this dispute.  So they took the matter to the beit din.

 

15:3  And the assembly escorted [and] sent them. And they were traveling in all of Phoenicia and also among the Samaritans, while recounting concerning the conversion of the Goyim, and causing great joy to all the brothers.  Notice that Paul has been converting Gentiles !?!?!?!

 

15:4  And when they came to Yerushalayim, they were received by the assembly, and by the emissaries, and by the elders: and they recounted to them all that Eloah had done with them.

15:5 And men stood up, those from the teaching of the P’rushim who had believed, and were saying, It is necessary for you to circumcise them, and, you should command them to observe the Torah of Moshe. 

 

Here the opponents argument is only abreviated. Here it is stated as:

 

It is necessary for you to circumcise them

and you should command them to observe the Torah of Moshe.

 

Why does it say this? This on the surface does not even look like the same argument they were making in Acst 15:1. However if we recall our remez it makes perfect sense. This is a statement of chronology:

 

[first] It is necessary for you to circumcise them and [second] you should command them to observe the Torah of Moshe.

 

Now we can see that they are still making the same argument as in 15:1.

 

15:6 And the emissaries and elders were gathered to look into this matter.

15:7 And when there had been much debate, Shim’on stood up and said to them, Men, our brothers, you know that from the first days from my mouth, Eloah chose that the Goyim should hear the Word of the Good News and Trust.

15:8 And Eloah, who knows what is in hearts, gave testimony concerning them, and gave to them the Ruach HaKodesh as [he did] to us.

15:9 And he made no distinction1264 between them and us, because he purified their hearts by trust.

 

Kefa presents the case in the traditional role of the Av Beit-Din.  Kefa addresses the opponant's position as fully stated in Acts 15:1. He points to evidence (from Acts 10-11) that salvation preceeds circumcision.  There is a word play here in the Aramaic. The word for "distinction" here is P'RASH which is related to P'RUSHA (Heb: PARUSH) "Pharisee" (from verse 5)

 

15: 10 And now, why do you tempt Eloah so that you place a yoke upon the necks of the talmidim, which neither our fathers, nor we, were able to bear?

15: 11 But by the favor of our Adon Yeshua the Messiah, we believe to have Life, like them.

 

The "yoke" her in context is NOT the Torah (although often the Torah is likened to a yoke). The context here is clear. Kefa is calling the argument of Paul' opponants a "yoke". Thus the "Yoke" in this passage involves earning salvation by works such as circumcision.

 

Kefa appeals to the patriarchs as an example. Abraham for example was saved by trust first in Gen. 15:6 and was circumcised LATER in Gen. 17.

 

Now Kefa has given two case examples:

 

1. Cornelius and his house (Acts 10-11)

 

2. The patriarch (especially Abraham) (Gen. 15:6 & Gen. 17)

 

In both cases Kefa points out that salvation preceeded circumcision.  (although in at least one of them circumcision still came later).

 

15:12  And all the assembly was silent, and listened to Paul and Bar Nabba, who were recounting everything that Eloah had done by their hands: signs, and mighty deeds, among the Goyim.

 

This paralles verse 3 where Paul is recounting conversions. Paul is likening these cases to the two case examples that Kefa has presented.

 

15:13 And after they were quiet, Ya'akov stood up and said, Men, our brothers: hear me.

15:14 Shim’on recounted to you how Eloah began to choose, from the Goyim, a people for His Name.

15:15 And to this the words of the prophets agree, like that which is written:

15:16 After these things I will return and set up the tabernacle of David which has fallen, and I will rebuild that which has fallen of it and I will raise it up,

15:17 So that the remnant of men might seek YHWH, and, all the Goyim, on whom My Name is called, says YHWH who made all these things.

15:18 The works of Eloah are known from old.

15:19  Because of this I say, They should not trouble those, who from the Goyim, have turned toward Eloah.

15:20 But let it be sent to them, that they should separate [themselves] from the uncleanness of that which is sacrificed [to idols], and from sexual immorality, and from that which is strangled, and from blood.

15: 21 For Moshe, from the first generations, had proclaimers in every city; in the synagogues, who read him on every Sabbath.

 

Now there is a Pharisaic tradition recorded in the Mishna tractate Sanhedrin which deals with which “apostate doctrines” were worthy of disfellowshipment. The Mishna passage in question reads:


All Israelites have a share in the world to come…
And these are the ones who have no part in the World to Come:
He who says, the resurrection of the dead is a teaching which is not derived from the Torah…
(m.San. 10:1)


The Talmud is made up the Mishna and the Gemara. In the Talmud a passage of Mishna is followed by commentary known as Gemara. In the Talmud the Gemara to m.Sanhedrin 10:1 begins at b.Sanhedrin 90a and runs through b.Sanhedrin 99a.

At around b.Sanhedrin 97a this section of Gemara transitions from a discussion of the doctrine of the resurrection (in 90a-96b) to a discussion on the timing of the coming of Messiah (in 97a-99a). This is not just a random shift, but a logical transition.

The transition point of this Gemara reads as follows:


Rabbi Nahman said to Rabbi Isaac: “Have you heard when Bar Nafle will come?”
“Who is Bar Nafle?”, he asked.
“Messiah,” he answered,
“Do you call Messiah Bar Nafle?”
“Even so,” he rejoined, “As it is written: “In that day, I will raise up the tabernacle of David ha-nofelet [that is fallen]. (Amos 9:11)”
(b.San 97a)


This Gemara defines “David” in this passage to refer to the Davidic Messiah and the “tabernacle” to refer to his physical body. Since the context of this Gemara is that of the resurrection, “raise up” in this context most certainly refers to “resurrection” This is very profound, because we have in this Gemara a reference to a “resurrection” of the physical body of Messiah being seen in Amos 9:11.

There is also evidence that this understanding of the “Tabernacle of David” in Amos 9:11-12 as being a reference to the Messiah existed by the first century. A document found among the Dead Sea Scrolls in cave 4 gives the following commentary in Amos 9:11:


“I shall raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen” (Amos 9:11).  This passage describes the fallen Branch of David,
whom He shall raise up to deliver Israel.
(Q174 III, 12-13)


This is the reason that Ya’akov cites the verse in Acts 15:16 as having an application not only in the Millennial Kingdom, but in the very time period of the Acts 15 council. Ya’akov was well aware that the “Tabernacle of David” was a reference to the body of the Messiah, and that its being “raised up” was understood as a prophecy of a resurrection of the Messiah after he had “fallen” (died).

 

(see comments to Acts 23:6)

 

A fuller version of the ruling is given below where veres 20 is expanded so I will comment upon it there.

 

However it is significant that Ya'akov presumes that these gentiles will be hearing [the Torah] of Moshe proclaimed in the synagogues on Shabbat.

 

Ya'akov seems to say here that the gentiles would need to maintain a minimum standard of purity and learn the Torah BEFORE becoming circumcised. Remember the issue being heard involves chronology of three things:

 

1. Becoming circumcised

2. Obtaining salvation/eternal life

3. Instruction in the Torah of Moshe

 

The above chronology is that of Paul's opponents. The beit din is determining if this is true or if another chronology should be followed, namely:

 

1. Obtaining salvation/eternal life

2. Instruction in the Torah of Moshe

3. Becoming circumcised

 

Paul's opponents placed circumcision first in the chronlogy, while Paul placed it last.

 

The beit-din agrees with Paul.

 

15:25 Because of this, all of us while gathered together purposed, and chose men and sent to you with our beloved Paul and Bar Nabba,

15:26 Men who have committed themselves, on behalf of the Name of our Adon Yeshua the Messiah.

15:27 And we have sent with them Y'hudah, and Sila, who will tell you these same [things] by speech.

15:28 For it was the will of the Ruach HaKodesh, and also of us, that a greater burden should not be placed on you, outside of those [things] that are necessary …

15:29 That you should abstain from that which is sacrificed [to idols], and from blood, and from [that which] is strangled, and from sexual immorality: that as you keep your nefeshot from these, you will do well; be steadfast in our Adon.

 

Note the phrase "a greater burden" this is not an exhaustive list but the furthest paramaters. The questionable areas made clear. There was no doubt as to whether gentiles could murder or steal so these are not listed.  Thus the furthest limits of idolatry would extend to include eating meat offerred to idols etc. With this in mind these closely parallel the seven laws of Noach. Also thse would set purity rules which would allow these gentiles to interact with the Torah observant community while learning the Torah.

 

The International Nazarene Beit Din has passed the following halacha elaborating on this ruling:

 

MISHNA:

 

Must the Goyim be circumcised according to the custom of the Torah to be saved?

 

Shim'on said: Men, our brothers, you know that from the first days from my mouth, Eloah chose that the Goyim should hear the Word of the Good News and Trust. And Eloah, who knows what is in hearts, gave testimony concerning them, and gave to them the Ruach HaKodesh as [he did] to us. And he made no distinction between them and us, because he purified their hearts by trust. And now, why do you

tempt Eloah so that you place a yoke upon the necks of the talmidim, which neither our fathers, nor we, were able to bear? But by the favor of our Adon Yeshua the Messiah, we believe to have Life, like them.

 

Paul and Bar Nabba, recounted everything that Eloah had done by their hands: signs, and mighty deeds, among the Goyim.

 

Ya'akov said, Men, our brothers: hear me. Shim'on recounted to you how Eloah began to choose, from the Goyim, a people for His Name. And to this the words of the prophets agree, like that which is written: After these things I will return and set up the tabernacle of David which has fallen, and I will rebuild that which has fallen of it and I will raise it up, So that the remnant of men might seek YHWH, and, all the Goyim, on whom My Name is called, says YHWH who made all

these things. The works of Eloah are known from old. (Amos 9:11-12)

 

Because of this I say, They should not trouble those, who from the Goyim, have turned toward Eloah. But let it be sent to them, that they should separate [themselves] from the uncleanness of that which is sacrificed [to idols], and from sexual immorality, and from that which is strangled, from blood. And that what is undesirable to yourself, you do not do to others.> For Moshe, from the first generations, had proclaimers in every city; in the synagogues, who read him on every Sabbath.

 

And they wrote a letter by their hands [saying] thus:

The emissaries, and elders, and brothers, to those who are in Antioch, and in Syria, and in Cilicia; brothers who are from the Goyim: shalom.

It has been heard by us, that men from us, have gone out: and, disturbed you with words and have upset your nefeshot, while saying that you must be circumcised and observe the Torah, which we did not command them.

Because of this, all of us while gathered together purposed, and chose men and sent to you with our beloved Paul and Bar Nabba,

Men who have committed themselves, on behalf of the Name of our Adon Yeshua the Messiah. And we have sent with them Y'hudah, and Sila, who will tell you these same [things] by speech.

 

It is the will of the Ruach HaKodesh and also of us that a greater

burden should not be placed on you, outside of those things that are

necessary. That you should abstain from:

 

1. That which is sacrificed to idols,

2. And from blood

3. And from that which is strangled

4. And from sexual immorality.

<5. And that what is undesirable to yourself, you do not do to others.>

 

That as you keep yourself from these, you will do well. Be steadfast in our Adon. (Acts 15:1-29) <> portion found only in the Western text type.

 

 

GEMARA:

 

How are we to understand "Goyim" here?

Here the reference is to the Ger Toshav, a repentant Gentile.

And who is a Ger Toshav?

Rabbi Meir says:

"Any [Gentile] who takes upon himself in the presence of three haberim not to worship idols." (b.Avodah Zarah 64b)

The Pharisaic Sages declare:

"Any [Gentile] who takes upon himself the seven precepts which the sons of Noah undertook; and still others maintain: These do not come within the category of a Ger Toshav; but who is a Ger Toshav? A proselyte who eats of animals not ritually slaughtered, i.e., he took upon himself to observe all the precepts mentioned in the Torah apart from the prohibition of [eating the flesh of] animals not ritually slaughtered. We may leave such a man alone with wine, but

we may not deposit wine in his charge even in a city where the majority of residents are Israelites. We may, however, leave him alone with wine even in a city where the majority of residents are heathens; and his oil is like his wine.' How can it enter your mind to say that his oil is like his wine; can oil become nesek! [The wording must be amended to] his wine is like his oil, but in every other respect he is like a heathen." (b.Avodah Zarah 64b)

Rabban Simeon says:

"His wine is yen nesek. Another version [of Rabban Simeon's statement] is: `It is allowed to be drunk [by Israelites].' At all events it teaches that `in every other respect he is like a heathen.' For what practical purpose [is this mentioned]? Is it not that he can annul an idol in the same manner as an idolater?" (b.Avodah Zarah 64b)

R. Nahman b. Isaac said:

"No; it is in connection with his power to transfer or renounce ownership; as it has been taught: An apostate Israelite who publicly observes the Sabbath may renounce his ownership, but if he does not observe the Sabbath publicly he may not renounce his ownership because [the Rabbis] said: An Israelite may transfer or renounce his ownership, whereas with a heathen this can only be done by

renting [his property]. In what way? — [One Israelite] can say to [another Israelite], `My ownership is acquired by you; my ownership is renounced in your favour,' and the latter has thereby acquired [the property] without the necessity of a formal assignment. (b.Avodah Zarah 64b)

The International Nazarene Beit Din Says:

"Any from the Goyim who takes upon himself the seven precepts of Noach."

 

What is signified by the phrase "a greater burden should not be placed

upon you"? Why not simply "no other burden should be placed upon you"?

 

It is because the pronouncement (of Acts 15) only outlined the greatest limits of the obligations of a Gentile, but it was not intended as an exhaustive list. Else why not include that they must abstain from murder? Was this ruling permitting Gentiles to murder? May it never be. Instead we are to understand this ruling as an abbreviation of the obligations Gentiles have under the Noachide Covenant as Sons of Noah.

 

The Pharisaic Rabbis taught:

"Seven precepts were the sons of Noah commanded:

justice; to bless the name, idolatry; adultery; bloodshed; robbery; and eating flesh cut from a living animal." (b.Sanhedrin 56b)

 

R. Hanania b. Gamaliel said:

"Also not to partake of the blood drawn from a living animal.

R. Hidka added emasculation.

R. Simeon added sorcery.

R. Jose said:

"The heathens were prohibited everything that is mentioned in the section on sorcery. viz., There shall not be found among you any one, that maketh his son or daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto

the Lord: and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them [sc. the heathens in Canaan] out from before thee. Now, [the Almighty] does not punish without first prohibiting.

R. Eleazar added the forbidden mixture [in plants and animals]: now, they are permitted to wear garments of mixed fabrics [of wool and linen] and sow diverse seeds together; they are forbidden only to hybridize heterogeneous animals and graft trees of different

kinds." (b.Sanhedrin 56b)

 

The International Nazarene Beit Din Says:

 

These are the Seven Precepts of Noah:

 

1. Justice – That which is hateful to yourself, do not do to others.

2. Blessing the Name

3. Against Idolatry – This law is clarified so as to even exclude

partaking of that which is sacrificed [to idols].

4. Against Sexual Immorality

5. Against Shedding Blood (murder)

6. Against Theft

7. Against Eating the Limb of a Living Animal and eating Blood

 

Whence do we know the seven precepts of Noah? —

R. Johanan answered: The Scripture says: `And the Adonai YHWH commanded the man saying, of every tree of the garden thou may freely eat.' (Gen. 2:16) And [He] commanded, refers to [the observance of] justice, and thus it is written, `For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment.'(Gen. 18:19)

Adonai-is [a prohibition against] blasphemy, and thus it is written, and he that blasphemeth the name of YHWH, he shall surely be put to death.(Lev. 24:16) YHWH-is [an injunction against] idolatry, and thus it is written, Thou shall have no other gods before Me. (Ex. 20:3) The man-refers to bloodshed [murder], and thus it is written, Whoso sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. (Gen. 9:6) `Saying'-refers to adultery, and thus it is written, They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and became another man's.(Jer. 3:1)

Of every tree of the garden-but not of robbery. You maye freely eat-but not flesh cut from a living animal.

 

When R. Isaac came, he taught a reversed interpretation. And He commanded-refers to idolatry; ELOHIM to social law. Now `ELOHIM' may rightly refer to social laws, as it is written, And the master of the house shall be brought unto elohim [i.e., the judges]. (Ex. 22:7) But how can `and He commanded' connote a prohibition of idolatry? —

 

R. Hisda and R. Isaac b. Abdimi-one cited the verse, They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, etc.(Ex. 32:8) And the other cited, Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment, because he willingly walked after the commandment.(Hosea 5:11) Wherein do they differ? — In respect of a heathen who made an idol but did not worship it: On the view [that the prohibition of idolatry is derived from] they have

made them a molten calf, guilt is incurred as soon as the idol is made [even before it is worshipped]; but according to the opinion that it is from, because he willingly walked after the commandment, there is no liability until the heathen actually follows and worships it.

 

Raba objected: Does any scholar maintain that a heathen is liable to punishment for making an idol even if he did not worship it? Surely it has been taught:

With respect to idolatry, such acts for which a Jewish Court decrees sentence of death [on Jewish delinquents] are forbidden to the heathen; but those for which a Jewish Court inflicts no capital penalty on Jewish delinquents are not forbidden to him. Now what does this exclude? Presumably the case of a heathen who made an idol without worshipping it? R. Papa answered: No. It excludes the embracing and kissing of idols. Of which idols do you say this? Is it of those whose normal worship is in this manner; but in that case he is surely liable to

death? — Hence it excludes the embracing and kissing of idols which are not usually worshipped thus.

 

`Justice.' Were then the children of Noah bidden to observe these? Surely it has been taught: The Israelites were given ten precepts at Marah, seven of which had already been accepted by the children of Noah, to which were added at Marah Justice ,the Sabbath, and honoring one's parents; `Justice,' for it is written, There [sc. at Marah] he made for them a statute and a MISHPAT (judgment) (Ex.

15:25); `the Sabbath and honoring one's parents'. for it is written, As the YHWH your Elohim commanded you! (Deut. 5:16) —

 

R. Nahman replied in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: The addition at Marah was only in respect of an assembly, witnesses, and formal admonition. If so, why say `to which were added Justice'? —

 

But Raba replied thus: The addition was only in respect of the laws of fines. (Deut. 22:19,29) But even so, should it not have been said, `additions were made in Justice'? —

 

But R. Aha b. Jacob answered thus: The Baraita informs us that they were commanded to set up law courts in every district and town. But were not the sons of Noah likewise commanded to do this? Surely it has been taught: Just as the Israelites were ordered to set up law courts in every district and town, so were the sons of Noah likewise enjoined to set up law courts in every district and town! —

 

But Raba answered thus: The author of this Baraita [which states that Justice were added at Marah] is a Tanna of the School of Manasseh, who omitted Justice and blasphemy [from the list of Noachian precepts] and substituted emasculation and the forbidden mixture [in plants, ploughing. etc.]. For a Tanna of the School of Manasseh taught: The sons of Noah were given seven precepts. viz., [prohibition of] idolatry, adultery, murder, robbery, flesh cut from a living animal, emasculation and forbidden mixtures.

 

R. Judah said: Adam was prohibited idolatry only, for it is written, And the Adonai YHWH commanded Adam.

 

R. Judah b. Batyra maintained: He was forbidden blasphemy too. Some add Justice. With whom does the following statement of Rab Judah in the name of Rab agree: viz., [Elohim said to Adam,] I am Elohim, do not curse Me; l am Elohim, do not exchange Me for another; I am Elohim, let My fear be upon you? — This agrees

with the last mentioned [who adds Justice to the list].

(b.San. 56b)

 

Now, what is the standpoint of the Tanna of the School of Manasseh? If he interprets the verse, And Adonai YHWH commanded etc. [as interpreted above], he should include these two [Justice and blasphemy] also, and if he does not, whence does he derive the prohibition of the rest? — In truth, he does not accept the interpretation of the verse, `And the Adonai YHWH commanded etc., but maintains that each of these [which he includes] is separately stated: Idolatry and adultery for it is written, The earth also was corrupt before Elohim (Gen. 6:2); and a Tanna of the School of R. Ishmael taught: Wherever corruption is mentioned, it must refer to immorality and idolatry.

 

`Immorality.' as it is written, for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. (Prov. 30:19) `Idolatry,' for it is written, Lest ye corrupt yourselves and make you a graven image, etc. (Deut. 4:16) And the other teacher [who deduces this from the verse, and Adonai YHWH commanded etc.]? He maintains that this verse [sc. the earth also etc.] merely describes their way of living.

 

`Bloodshed', as it is written, Whoso sheddeth man's blood, etc.(Gen. 9:6) And the other? — This verse [he will maintain] merely teaches the manner of execution.

 

Theft, for it is written, As the wild herbs have I given you all things; upon which R. Levi commented: as the wild herbs, but not as the cultivated herbs. And the other? — He will hold that this verse is written to permit animal flesh, [but not to prohibit robbery].

 

Flesh cut from the living animal, as it is written, But flesh with the life

thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. (Gen. 9:4) And the other? — He may hold that this verse teaches that flesh cut from live reptiles is permitted.

 

Emasculation, for it is written, Bring forth abundantly in the earth, and

multiply therein. And the other? — He may regard this merely as a blessing.

 

Forbidden mixture, as it is said, Of fowls after their kind. (Gen. 6:20) And the other? — He will maintain that this was merely for the sake of mating.

(b.San. 56b-57a)

 

Zakan Ingalls said:

"Noach and his sons knew the difference between clean and unclean animals. Since only one male and one female of each unclean animal were in the Ark (Gen. 7:2), if we hold that Genesis 9:2 would have allowed Noach and his sons to eat unclean meat, then eating one of the unclean animals destroys that animal type forever and negates YHWH's own purpose in preserving that animal type from the flood.

Further, if Adam is made in the image of Elohim (Genesis 1:27, 9:6, Ya'aqov 3:9), Noach's offering of only clean animals (Genesis 8:20) indicates that only clean animals should be on the tables of a Noachide."

 

But the International Nazarene Beit Din said:

"In the days of Noach the clean animals were those suitable for offering to YHWH, for at the time YHWH referred to these as "clean" and "unclean" (Gen. 7:2; 8:20) only vegetable matter was kosher (Gen. 1:29) and only after this time did any animals at all become kosher (Gen. 9:3).

 

The International Nazarene Beit Din Says:

"From where do we derive the Seven precepts of Noach"?

Justice – For we read "Whoso sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed…" (Gen. 9:6)

Blessing the Name- For the serpent blasphemed YHWH by questioning his word when he said "has Elohim said…?" (Gen. 3:1) Also we read "Whoso sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of Elohim, made He man." (Gen. 9:6) murder is forbidden because it destroys an Image of Elohim.

 

Idolatry- For we read in the Torah that man sought to make himself Elohim when the Serpent told him "you shall be as Elohim, knowing good and evil." (Gen. 3:5)

 

Sexual Immorality – For we read that man was to be joined "male and female" that the woman was told "your desire shall be to your husband" (Gen. 3:16) and that man's sexual relations were to be fruitful and result in reproduction as we read "be fruitful and multiply" (Gen. 9:1,7). Moreover we read of the fallen angels who came to man, "the sons of Elohim saw the daughters of men, that they were fair. And they took them wives, whomsoever they chose…. the sons of Elohim

came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. …And YHWH saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth,…" (Gen. 6:1-5).

 

Against Shedding of Blood. – For we read that YHWH judged Cain for killing Able (Gen. 4) also we read "Whoso sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of Elohim, made He man." (Gen. 9:6)

 

Against Theft – For we read in the Torah "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it." (Gen. 2:17) and again we read "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof and did eat. And she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. (Gen. 3:6) thus man's first sin was an act of theft.

 

Against Eating the Limb of a Living Animal and eating Blood – For we read "Every moving thing that lives shall be for food for you; as the green herb have I given you all. Only flesh with the life thereof--which is the blood thereof--shall you not eat." (Gen. 9:3-4)

 

 

How are we to understand "you will do well" (Acts 15:29)?

 

Our sages presupposed that these Gentiles would be going to synagogue on Sabbath and learning the Torah of Moses (Acts 15:21). The Ger Toshav, by definition, dwells among us, thus they are attending Synagogue and learning the Torah on the Sabbath. The issue

before the Beit Din was only whether or not Gentiles need to be

circumcised to be saved, not whether they should eventually be

circumcised. Yeshua commissioned his Talmidim as follows:

 

Go you therefore, and teach all the Goyim,

and immerse them in the name of the Father,

and the Son, and the Ruach HaKodesh.

and teach them to observe all that I have commanded you,

and here I am with you all the days, to the end of the world.

(Matt. 28:19-20)

 

Yehsua was instructing his Jewish Talmidim to make converts of the

goyim and to teach the goyim to observe all that Yeshua had commanded his Jewish talmidim to observe. Our sage Yochanan writes to us concerning Messiah "He who says, I am in him, out to conduct himself according to his conduct." (1Jn. 2:6) that is, as a Jew, not as a Noachide.

 

The Noachide covenant is a betrothal to YHWH as the Mosaic Covenant is a marriage to YHWH. A betrothal by definition is a prelude to a marriage.

Views: 98

Comment

You need to be a member of Nazarene Space to add comments!

Join Nazarene Space

 

 

 

















 

LINKS

 

 

 

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service