The Torah: A Marital Contract
Since the Nazarenes were religious Jews who had come to believe in Yahshua, they would have been drilled in the fundamentals of Judaism from the time they were able to talk. One of Judaism’s fundamentals, then, is that when Yahweh brought the Children of Israel up from their bondage in Egypt, He brought them to the foot of Mount Sinai, and there gave them a code of Instructions that essentially amounted to a spiritual marital contract. This spiritual marital contract was called the Law of Moses, otherwise called the Torah, in Hebrew. In truth, the word Torah does not actually translate to ‘Law.’ It is called the Law because the Words of the King of the Universe do carry the weight of Law. However, the word Torah actually translates to Instruction; and in this context, it means the bride’s Instructions. [In a Hebrew betrothal ceremony there is a set of written instructions from the Groom that the Bride must agree on keeping. It is called a ~Ketubah]. The Torah, then, was the written Instruction [keatubah] that anyone wishing to become (YHWH’s) bride should practice, because it would ‘purify’ them. Further, it was given as a kind of a betrothal:
The Children of Israel gave their “I do’s” at the foot of Mount Sinai: Then all the people answered together and said, "All that YHWH has spoken, we will do.” [Exodus 19:8] [Moses and Aaron were the witnesses, the cloud over the mountain was the wedding canopy/chuppah, the Sabbath was/is the ring. In Hebrew custom, when a man is betrothed to a woman, he goes to prepare a place (build a house) for her.] Yahshua tells us that He went to prepare a place for His bride, in His Father’s House: 2 In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. [Yochanan (John) 14:2-4]
In light of this knowledge we need to ask ourselves one very important question: If the Torah is the marital contract between (YHWH) and His people, then why do the Christians want to see it abolished? Why indeed? Moses (or Moshe) tells us that YHWH gave the Torah to Israel for her own good: 12 “And now, Israel, what has YHWH your Elohim asked of you, except to fear YHWH your Elohim, to walk in all His ways, and to love Him; and to serve YHWH your Elohim with all your heart, and with all your soul; to keep the commandments of YHWH, and His statutes, which I am commanding you today for your good.” [Devarim (Deuteronomy) 10:12-13]
The thought of a loving bride rejoicing that the Bridegroom came to set her free from something that was given to her for her good makes absolutely no sense; but Christianity is based upon this very premise. However, realizing that the Torah was given as a list of requests from the King of the Universe to His fiancée, we can now understand verses like Yochanan Aleph (1st John) 2:3-5, which tell us that unless we truly desire to keep the Bridegroom’s Torah, we do not really know (or love) the Bridegroom: 3 And by this we know that we know Him; if we keep His commandments. 4 He who says, “I have known Him,” but not keeping His Commandments is a liar; and the Truth is not in that one. 5 But whoever keeps His Word, truly in this one the love of Elohim has been perfected: By this we know we are in Him. [First John 2:3-5]
Then he also tells us that: Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness; for sin is lawlessness. [Yochanan Aleph (1st John) 3:4]
The Nazarenes might consider that if sin is lawlessness, then lawlessness is sin. Therefore, if one ignores His Bridal Contract, one is essentially sinning. Humans were created as a bride unto YHWH; and if we are unwilling to keep the King’s Bridal Contract, then we cannot truly respect (or love) the Bridegroom.
Epiphanius and M. Simon admit that the Apostles kept the Law; and yet Christianity generally refuses to acknowledge this fact. It is even recorded that the Church originally excluded Yochanan’s (John’s) letters from the Canon, because His Pro-Torah writings conflicted with the Roman Church doctrines. In modern times, many Christians still hold to this anti-Law stance, citing John 3:16 in their defense: 16 For Elohim so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. [Yochanan (John) 3:16]
Christianity interprets this verse to mean that in order to receive eternal life, all one must do is to believe on Yahshua; and, perhaps, to call upon His Name. This may seem right, but only twenty verses later we are told that unless we obey the Torah, such thought-belief is not enough: 36 “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of Elohim abides on him.” [Yochanan (John) 3:36]
This passage confuses many Christians. If the Law is abolished, then what is it that the Baptist says that they are to obey? The Baptist, however, speaks clearly. He tells us that if we believe in the Son, we will receive eternal life. However, if we do not obey the Son’s Instructions
(Torah) then we will not see that life, as the Bridegroom will refuse to take to Himself any bride who does not love Him enough to do what He asks. Many Christians cannot bring themselves to accept John the Baptist’s words, because they conflict with concepts they have always held dear. The King James translators could not accept John the Baptist’s words either, and so they translated John 3:36 as follows: 36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God [Elohim] abideth on him. [John 3:36, KJV]
Here we see some of the anti-Law bias that Kefa (Peter) warned us about, in his second epistle (above). The King James translation suggests that if we believe in Yahshua, we have everlasting life. However, if we do not believe Yahshua, we will not receive eternal life. This seems to make perfect sense: The only problem is that it conflicts with the Greek Texts.
When we study this passage in the Greek, we find there are two different words in the Greek, both of which were translated into the English as ‘believe.’ However, only one of these words is correct: 36 He that [Strong’s G#4100] on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that [Strong’s G#544] the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. [John 3:36, KJV]
Strong’s G#4100 is ‘pisteuoon’, meaning to think something is true (or to believe that something is true, but only in an intellectual sense). In contrast, Strong’s G#544 is ‘apeithoon’, meaning to disbelieve, in the sense of disobeying. When we plug these words in at the appropriate places, we see that what John the Baptist really said is that anyone thinking Yahshua is the Messiah does indeed receive eternal life. However, unless this thought-belief leads them to obey the Marital Covenant, they will not be taken as part of His bride; and therefore they will not see eternal life. In other words, John the Baptist tells us that to live forever, one must obey the Bridal Covenant (so that one can be taken as part of the bride).
You say you love Him, but do you love Him enough to do what He says?
Another example: In the West, the verb ‘hear’ does not necessarily imply any kind of obedience, and so Westerners might take the mistaken impression that the only requirement was to ‘hear’ the Torah being read. In Hebrew, however, the verb ‘to hear’ is the verb ‘Shema’; and this word does imply obedience. To shema is to hear-and-obey, as one might hear one’s King utter a commandment.
These words are clear, but Christianity insists that the Torah is too difficult to keep; and that asking the believers to keep the Commandments is an impossible, unnecessary burden. This, however, is against the Apostle Yochanan’s (John’s) first epistle: 2 By this we know that we love the children of Elohim: when we love Elohim, and keep His commandments. 3 For this is the love of Elohim: that we keep His commandments, and His commandments are not burdensome (to us). [1st John 5:2-3]
The reason the Nazarenes did not find His Commandments to be burdensome was because they loved their Husband, and wanted to do whatever they could, to please Him. Conversely, the Christians said they loved their Husband, but yet they rejoiced at the thought that they had been set free from doing those things He had said would please Him. One may well ask, “Which one of these two philosophies is really motivated by Love?”
While pondering that question, consider that at Acts 24:14, the Nazarene Apostle Shaul told us that he still believed all things that had been written in the Law, and the Prophets: “According to the Way which they say is a sect (KJV: heresy), so I worship the ancestral One; believing all things that are written in the Law and the Prophets!” [Acts 24:14]
This could not have reliably been said of any Christian. However, as we will see, the Nazarene Apostle Shaul was willing to part with a relatively large sum of money to publicly demonstrate that he still believed in obeying even the most seemingly-obscure Commands that were written in the Law.
Next Page - Does Love Do Away With the Law? - Click HERE .
The Children of Israel gave their “I do’s” at the foot of Mount Sinai: Then all the people answered together and said, "All that YHWH has spoken, we will do.” [Exodus 19:8] [Moses and Aaron were the witnesses, the cloud over the mountain was the wedding canopy/chuppah, the Sabbath was/is the ring. In Hebrew custom, when a man is betrothed to a woman, he goes to prepare a place (build a house) for her.] Yahshua tells us that He went to prepare a place for His bride, in His Father’s House: 2 In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. [Yochanan (John) 14:2-4]
In light of this knowledge we need to ask ourselves one very important question: If the Torah is the marital contract between (YHWH) and His people, then why do the Christians want to see it abolished? Why indeed? Moses (or Moshe) tells us that YHWH gave the Torah to Israel for her own good: 12 “And now, Israel, what has YHWH your Elohim asked of you, except to fear YHWH your Elohim, to walk in all His ways, and to love Him; and to serve YHWH your Elohim with all your heart, and with all your soul; to keep the commandments of YHWH, and His statutes, which I am commanding you today for your good.” [Devarim (Deuteronomy) 10:12-13]
The thought of a loving bride rejoicing that the Bridegroom came to set her free from something that was given to her for her good makes absolutely no sense; but Christianity is based upon this very premise. However, realizing that the Torah was given as a list of requests from the King of the Universe to His fiancée, we can now understand verses like Yochanan Aleph (1st John) 2:3-5, which tell us that unless we truly desire to keep the Bridegroom’s Torah, we do not really know (or love) the Bridegroom: 3 And by this we know that we know Him; if we keep His commandments. 4 He who says, “I have known Him,” but not keeping His Commandments is a liar; and the Truth is not in that one. 5 But whoever keeps His Word, truly in this one the love of Elohim has been perfected: By this we know we are in Him. [First John 2:3-5]
Then he also tells us that: Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness; for sin is lawlessness. [Yochanan Aleph (1st John) 3:4]
The Nazarenes might consider that if sin is lawlessness, then lawlessness is sin. Therefore, if one ignores His Bridal Contract, one is essentially sinning. Humans were created as a bride unto YHWH; and if we are unwilling to keep the King’s Bridal Contract, then we cannot truly respect (or love) the Bridegroom.
Epiphanius and M. Simon admit that the Apostles kept the Law; and yet Christianity generally refuses to acknowledge this fact. It is even recorded that the Church originally excluded Yochanan’s (John’s) letters from the Canon, because His Pro-Torah writings conflicted with the Roman Church doctrines. In modern times, many Christians still hold to this anti-Law stance, citing John 3:16 in their defense: 16 For Elohim so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son; that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. [Yochanan (John) 3:16]
Christianity interprets this verse to mean that in order to receive eternal life, all one must do is to believe on Yahshua; and, perhaps, to call upon His Name. This may seem right, but only twenty verses later we are told that unless we obey the Torah, such thought-belief is not enough: 36 “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of Elohim abides on him.” [Yochanan (John) 3:36]
This passage confuses many Christians. If the Law is abolished, then what is it that the Baptist says that they are to obey? The Baptist, however, speaks clearly. He tells us that if we believe in the Son, we will receive eternal life. However, if we do not obey the Son’s Instructions
(Torah) then we will not see that life, as the Bridegroom will refuse to take to Himself any bride who does not love Him enough to do what He asks. Many Christians cannot bring themselves to accept John the Baptist’s words, because they conflict with concepts they have always held dear. The King James translators could not accept John the Baptist’s words either, and so they translated John 3:36 as follows: 36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God [Elohim] abideth on him. [John 3:36, KJV]
Here we see some of the anti-Law bias that Kefa (Peter) warned us about, in his second epistle (above). The King James translation suggests that if we believe in Yahshua, we have everlasting life. However, if we do not believe Yahshua, we will not receive eternal life. This seems to make perfect sense: The only problem is that it conflicts with the Greek Texts.
When we study this passage in the Greek, we find there are two different words in the Greek, both of which were translated into the English as ‘believe.’ However, only one of these words is correct: 36 He that [Strong’s G#4100] on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that [Strong’s G#544] the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. [John 3:36, KJV]
Strong’s G#4100 is ‘pisteuoon’, meaning to think something is true (or to believe that something is true, but only in an intellectual sense). In contrast, Strong’s G#544 is ‘apeithoon’, meaning to disbelieve, in the sense of disobeying. When we plug these words in at the appropriate places, we see that what John the Baptist really said is that anyone thinking Yahshua is the Messiah does indeed receive eternal life. However, unless this thought-belief leads them to obey the Marital Covenant, they will not be taken as part of His bride; and therefore they will not see eternal life. In other words, John the Baptist tells us that to live forever, one must obey the Bridal Covenant (so that one can be taken as part of the bride).
You say you love Him, but do you love Him enough to do what He says?
Another example: In the West, the verb ‘hear’ does not necessarily imply any kind of obedience, and so Westerners might take the mistaken impression that the only requirement was to ‘hear’ the Torah being read. In Hebrew, however, the verb ‘to hear’ is the verb ‘Shema’; and this word does imply obedience. To shema is to hear-and-obey, as one might hear one’s King utter a commandment.
These words are clear, but Christianity insists that the Torah is too difficult to keep; and that asking the believers to keep the Commandments is an impossible, unnecessary burden. This, however, is against the Apostle Yochanan’s (John’s) first epistle: 2 By this we know that we love the children of Elohim: when we love Elohim, and keep His commandments. 3 For this is the love of Elohim: that we keep His commandments, and His commandments are not burdensome (to us). [1st John 5:2-3]
The reason the Nazarenes did not find His Commandments to be burdensome was because they loved their Husband, and wanted to do whatever they could, to please Him. Conversely, the Christians said they loved their Husband, but yet they rejoiced at the thought that they had been set free from doing those things He had said would please Him. One may well ask, “Which one of these two philosophies is really motivated by Love?”
While pondering that question, consider that at Acts 24:14, the Nazarene Apostle Shaul told us that he still believed all things that had been written in the Law, and the Prophets: “According to the Way which they say is a sect (KJV: heresy), so I worship the ancestral One; believing all things that are written in the Law and the Prophets!” [Acts 24:14]
This could not have reliably been said of any Christian. However, as we will see, the Nazarene Apostle Shaul was willing to part with a relatively large sum of money to publicly demonstrate that he still believed in obeying even the most seemingly-obscure Commands that were written in the Law.
Next Page - Does Love Do Away With the Law? - Click HERE .