Paul Bethke vs the 613 Mitzvot

[Paul Bethke]

In other words, these laws must be taken as a whole and considered and interpreted in a broad context? Rather than individual items selected to be proclaimed as paramount and literally followed?

That does not appear to be what you are doing. Can you reconcile this for us by informing us how you have done this to come up with your interpretation of the adultery standard you propose?

As I have posted, it is clear that all the Torah must be evaluated in the light of what Jesus decreed.

Now marriage is the prime reason the Creator embarked upon creation. It was and still is the pinnacle of his will today.

The Torah was given predominantly to establish and protect the family structure, and adultery is the violation of the family structure. The Torah instructed the Hebrews how to conduct their new way of living when they were set free.

It took all the circumstances they would encounter into account and prepared them how to respond.

Now this being the situation, these laws still have an application today, based on the Ten Commands being pivotal.

There were laws pertaining to individuals, and there were national laws pertaining to the nation.

Now marriage is the most essential law, and adultery is the main reason of the destruction of the family unity.

Mat 19:4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'
Mat 19:5 and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?
Mat 19:6 So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."((what God has decreed))

So it is mandatory to go to the beginning, and proceed from there in order to understand what was the subsequent events that took place. Sexual immorality and violence brought about the demise of the people in the day of Noah, Noah was spared because he held onto the marriage covenant that was decreed---one man for one woman.

 

[JayUtah]

Today there are many good translations that make understanding the ancient languages clear.

We've been over this countless times. There are always errors in translations, and always choices to be made in the process. A translation can never faithfully replicate the precise meaning of the original texts.

Further, we have amply demonstrated that you can't tell a good translation from a bad one. We've further demonstrated that you don't base your choice of translation on its purported strength, but rather whether it renders the meaning you decided ahead of time you wanted.

You are the dishonest one calling me dishonest—

No, he is not dishonest. He is legitimately pointing out errors you have committed the reasons why you committed them. You are not entitled to accuse people of lying simply because you refuse to believe a factual presentation.

You have no knowledge of prophecy...

No, there is no magical body of understanding that only you have mastered.

I can do that with modern technology.

On more than one occasion we have tested your ability to do this, and it is clear you cannot.

 

[JayUtah]

As I have posted, it is clear that all the Torah must be evaluated in the light of what Jesus decreed.

And that process of evaluation is the interpretation you claim you do not do. This is the essential misrepresentation of every literalist. In fact no literalist is actually literal. He simply denies that he applies any interpretation, and by so doing hopes to place that interpretation beyond scrutiny.

Claiming that you are scrupulously obedient to the mitzvot as you interpret them is rather a contradiction. You can simply interpret your way around any desired non-compliance. This is a reasonable approach, and many do it. However, in doing so you abandon any claim to superiority by virtue of your supposedly uninterpreted approach. You end up no better than any other Christian or Jew who picks and chooses which parts of the scripture they'll follow and manufactures any number of rationales for it.

 

[Craig B]

Peters vision was not about abolishing the Kosher laws, it was given to him to show him that Gentiles can also be considered clean acceptable to God. The very statement show this. You are like the people who want to see the Torah made null and void.

How does a person like yourself who claims to know the ancient languages interpret the event so erroneously?

Let's see if there are any other errors in the interpretation of these events.

And again, when Peter addressed the Jerusalem council he did not say that the dietary laws were abolished, but rather that Yahweh had declared the Gentiles who adopted the Torah as clean.

Act 15:19 "It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God.

Act 15:20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.

But it is good of you to allow me the opportunity to clear up this misconception.

Alas, you have introduced another misconception, namely that Peter delivered that judgement at the Council. It was not Peter but James who made the declaration:

Acts 15:13 When they finished, James spoke up. “Brothers,” he said, “listen to me ... 19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols ... etc"​

 

[Slowvehicle]

Today there are many good translations that make understanding the ancient languages clear.

Yes, there are. And not one, NOT EVEN ONE, of the good translations makes the silly error you make, deciding for yourself that "virgin" can refer to a sexually-active person.

Not one, NOT EVEN ONE, of the good translations includes the slightest reference to highly-pigmented skin being a "curse" for eating monkey meat.

And not one, NOT EVEN ONE, obscures the fact that "Peter's" rooftop "vision" including 'god' telling "Peter" to eat of non-kosher foods.

The fact that you brag of not being able to read the actual texts does not excuse your willful ignorance of what the text says.

Given that you claim to be a devotee of the things Jesus was said to be said to have said, you might profit from reading and understanding (to say nothig of self-applying) the 'god'spiel attributed to "Matthew", Ch. 23, v. 13 ff...

You are the dishonest one calling me dishonest—the errors you claim I have is due to your inability to understand what you claim to know.

You, personally, stand on record as having told a clear and transparent lie about me...and you refuse to step up to it.

This does not, by the way, even begin to address your continued obdurate errors in the face of correction.

You have no knowledge of prophecy, only the ability to read the originals, which are not original. So, line upon line and word upon word. I can do that with modern technology.

Actually, I deny that there is such a thing as what you want to be allowed to pretend to call "prophecy".understand the words upon which you oretend to base your odd dogmas. (Of course, admitting to the actual meanings of the actual words would obviate their pretended use as "support" for your silly claims.)

So to be fair, you can never at this time understand prophecy, because it is a revelation of the will of the Creator.

You have failed to demonstrate the least bit of evidence for this "creator" of yours. That is but one of your legion of evidentiary failings...

The lie you told about me is still there for all to see. How sad that you are willing to leave uncorrected yet another example of your fundamental dishonesty.

 

[Pooneil]

Now marriage is the prime reason the Creator embarked upon creation.

So now you know the full and complete motivation of your god? Is your god limited to just what is found in the Bible? The hubris just gets higher and higher.

 

[Loss Leader]

Not to light a fire on the Sabbath is not practical, as one cannot stop combustion that generates electricity. So, does one not use heat appliances on the Sabbath—what when winter comes and there are minus temperatures?

Orthodox Jews will not use turn on or off any electric item (including heaters) on the Sabbath. Ultra-Orthodox won't use any electricity at all.

It appears that you've disregarded this rule because it seems inconvenient to you. But one should be inconvenienced by the Sabbath.

If this is your test for which rules you discard, I expect that the most convenient thing is to discard all of them.

 

[halleyscomet]

Orthodox Jews will not use turn on or off any electric item (including heaters) on the Sabbath. Ultra-Orthodox won't use any electricity at all.



It appears that you've disregarded this rule because it seems inconvenient to you. But one should be inconvenienced by the Sabbath.



If this is your test for which rules you discard, I expect that the most convenient thing is to discard all of them.

I long ago concluded that was his test for what rules to follow. I suspect he dislikes pork and shellfish, so avoiding those foods are natural for him. He's indicated he ignores the circumcision law. It would hurt to get circumcised, and if he isn't circumcised already then getting circumcised would be inconvenient to say the least.

The clothing laws fall into the same category. As recently as a few pages ago he was feigning ignorance of them, despite having been explicitly asked chapter and verse about them in the past. They would look odd in South Africa, so that makes them inconvenient as well.

Again and again he demonstrates not only ongoing ignorance of the laws he claims are so important, but expresses open hostility to discussing any of them. These are not the actions of a man who actually believes these laws are of any value. I think he has a personal attitude about how HE behaves; he feels a need to prop up his personal preferences by claiming they're ordained by a deity. He doesn't have the strength of character to say, "No thank you, I don't like pork." He needs to outsource willpower to his imaginary friend.

I suspect he's used to using this bluff and bluster with people who don't realize the OT laws go well beyond keeping kosher and sacrificing at the temple. Now he's stuck between a rock and a hard place. He can't back off the claim that the Mitzvot are still required without admitting he was wrong about religion, but he's also realizing we're not going to stop asking him about all the laws he's ignoring. He keeps going back to his sex obsessions in what appears to be a sad, pathetic effort to distract us from the fundamental hypocrisy and lies in his professed theology.

 

[JayUtah]

[Torah-prescribed clothing] would look odd in South Africa, so that makes them inconvenient as well.

They look odd almost everywhere except in Israel, New York, and perhaps other Jewish enclaves. But that's the point. The dress and grooming laws were to set the Israelite people apart from everyone else and make them easily and instantly recognized. His unwillingness to do so for convenience's sake would violate the very intent of the law.

[H]e feels a need to prop up his personal preferences by claiming they're ordained by a deity.

As is many people's approach to religion. They don't shape their lives based on their beliefs. They seek out a church that already preaches what they're looking for and use that as the justification for their present busybody behavior -- an excuse not to take responsibility for it. It's a common weakness of character, it seems.

I suspect he's used to using this bluff and bluster with people who don't realize the OT laws go well beyond keeping kosher and sacrificing at the temple. Now he's stuck between a rock and a hard place.

I gather his gaslighting approach has met with success in some way in the past. It may work fine for casual Christians and casual critics, but he gets stuck when people don't just roll over and accept it when Paul tells them they're wrong. And the more stuck he gets, the more blatantly irrational his claims, which sooner or later drives people to toss him out the door altogether.

 

[Paul Bethke]

I long ago concluded that was his test for what rules to follow. I suspect he dislikes pork and shellfish, so avoiding those foods are natural for him. He's indicated he ignores the circumcision law. It would hurt to get circumcised, and if he isn't circumcised already then getting circumcised would be inconvenient to say the least.

The clothing laws fall into the same category. As recently as a few pages ago he was feigning ignorance of them, despite having been explicitly asked chapter and verse about them in the past. They would look odd in South Africa, so that makes them inconvenient as well.

Again and again he demonstrates not only ongoing ignorance of the laws he claims are so important, but expresses open hostility to discussing any of them. These are not the actions of a man who actually believes these laws are of any value. I think he has a personal attitude about how HE behaves; he feels a need to prop up his personal preferences by claiming they're ordained by a deity. He doesn't have the strength of character to say, "No thank you, I don't like pork." He needs to outsource willpower to his imaginary friend.

I suspect he's used to using this bluff and bluster with people who don't realize the OT laws go well beyond keeping kosher and sacrificing at the temple. Now he's stuck between a rock and a hard place. He can't back off the claim that the Mitzvot are still required without admitting he was wrong about religion, but he's also realizing we're not going to stop asking him about all the laws he's ignoring. He keeps going back to his sex obsessions in what appears to be a sad, pathetic effort to distract us from the fundamental hypocrisy and lies in his professed theology.

All laws contained in the Torah are considered as Jesus directed.

The Torah as I said was to establish a way of life for the newly freed Hebrews, as they came out of a culture that was void of the Creators will.

It prepared them for their entrance into the land of Canaan where they would establish a kingdom.
The priests and the Temple were the central theme to the worship of Yahweh.

Worship was the adherence to the laws that were taught, worship was obedience. This was introduced so that the Hebrews would not associate the worship of Yahweh with the way the other nations worshiped their deities.

As I stated there were laws for individuals and there were laws for the nation as a whole.
But as I stressed, marriage was the most important factor in worship, because the national judicial law and the individual laws was structured for family unity.

Without the sanctity of marriage, a nation and a people will dissolve as is the case today with so much infidelity.

So I do expect those who do not have a sanctified marriage will always try to undermine the truth by advocating lies.

 

[Paul Bethke]

And that process of evaluation is the interpretation you claim you do not do. This is the essential misrepresentation of every literalist. In fact no literalist is actually literal. He simply denies that he applies any interpretation, and by so doing hopes to place that interpretation beyond scrutiny.

Claiming that you are scrupulously obedient to the mitzvot as you interpret them is rather a contradiction. You can simply interpret your way around any desired non-compliance. This is a reasonable approach, and many do it. However, in doing so you abandon any claim to superiority by virtue of your supposedly uninterpreted approach. You end up no better than any other Christian or Jew who picks and chooses which parts of the scripture they'll follow and manufactures any number of rationales for it.

No one picks and chooses, as I have stated a sanctified marriage is the prerequisite of the faith
Dietary laws which is the consumption of food is second to a sanctified marriage. A person can observe the required laws, but if there is adultery then the observation of the laws are of no value.

National laws are applied to the nation of Israel. Individual laws that make up the national laws like the Ten Commands are a basis of family laws.

You seem to lack the ability to distinguish.

Israel today have abandoned the national laws as well as the individual laws.

http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

For each mitzvah, I have provided a citation to the biblical passage or passages from which it is derived, based primarily on Rambam. For commandments that can be observed today, I have also provided citations to the Chafetz Chayim's Concise Book of Mitzvot (CCA refers to affirmative commandments; CCN refers to negative commandments; CCI refers to commandments that only apply in Israel). Commandments that cannot be observed today primarily relate to the Temple, its sacrifices and services (because the Temple does not exist) and criminal procedures (because the theocratic state of Israel does not exist).

So now you can read for yourself. BUT do not forget the sanctified marriage covenant

 

[Paul Bethke]

We've been over this countless times. There are always errors in translations, and always choices to be made in the process. A translation can never faithfully replicate the precise meaning of the original texts.

There are errors in the copies of the ancient scrolls, because the originals are not available only copies. It is a simple matter to start at the beginning in order to understand the whole revelation.

Further, we have amply demonstrated that you can't tell a good translation from a bad one. We've further demonstrated that you don't base your choice of translation on its purported strength, but rather whether it renders the meaning you decided ahead of time you wanted.

There are many good translations and commentaries out here today. But even if that is not true there are the Ten Commands that are beyond error—so staying with those, the Gospel can be proclaimed, because all Scripture as a revelation pivots on them.

The revelation in Scripture denotes the adherence to the Ten Commands (The Covenant that Yahweh spoke) and the response of Israel to them.

No, he is not dishonest. He is legitimately pointing out errors you have committed the reasons why you committed them. You are not entitled to accuse people of lying simply because you refuse to believe a factual presentation.

People accuse me of lying because they do not understand prophecy (the ability to understand the will of the Creator.) Now if people do not understand something, they base their assumption on error.

No, there is no magical body of understanding that only you have mastered.
On more than one occasion we have tested your ability to do this, and it is clear you cannot.

I understand the simplicity of the perfect will of the Creator, as stated in the beginning.
[hilight] Mat 19:4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'
Mat 19:5 and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?
Mat 19:6 So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."[/hilite]

So, the beginning is where to start—not the middle or the END, but the beginning.

Today the world is in violation with what the Creator intended—so now the Creator Yahweh will enforce his will on the world in order to get people to comply. So, a declaration will proceed judgement.

Rejoicing in Heaven
Rev 19:1 After this I heard what sounded like the roar of a great multitude in heaven shouting: "Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God,
Rev 19:2 for true and just are his judgments. He has condemned the great prostitute who corrupted the earth by her adulteries. He has avenged on her the blood of his servants."

The meaning is that Yahweh has condemned those who commit adultery.

 

[Border Reiver]

No one picks and chooses, as I have stated a sanctified marriage is the prerequisite of the faith
Dietary laws which is the consumption of food is second to a sanctified marriage. A person can observe the required laws, but if there is adultery then the observation of the laws are of no value.

And if you ignore the rest of the law, you keeping to your sanctified marriage will be of no value.

You are picking and choosing which of the laws to follow.

You choose not be circumcised, or to have your sons circumcised.

You choose not to wear the tassels, bind a phylactery, or to keep your hair and beard in the prescribed manner.

You choose to not keep the feasts.

You do not have a parapet around the roof of your house.

You've admitted to the lighting of a fire on the Sabbath (by using electricity).

Face it, Bethkeianty is just like EVERY other religion - you claim that a supernatural being blesses your personal choices and prejudices.

 

[halleyscomet]

All laws contained in the Torah are considered as Jesus directed.

Based upon your posts you do not live your life as if you actually believed that.

You can excuse and wiggle all you want but that doesn't change the simple fact that, according to your own words, you do not live your life as if you believed the Mitzvot were relevant to modern Christians.

Do you deny your wife food, clothing or sex? Why is even this simple Mitzvot so terrifying you refuse to answer if you follow it?

 

[JayUtah]

There are errors in the copies of the ancient scrolls, because the originals are not available only copies.

This does not mean they're still not better than a further translation.

It is a simple matter to start at the beginning in order to understand the whole revelation.

What evidence do you have that your critics have not done this, as you assumed?

There are many good translations and commentaries out here today.

You didn't address the point. It is a matter of documented fact that you do not choose good translations, that you wrongly suppose things about the original text that you infer only from translations, and that you have made factual errors about what the text actually says because you rely upon bad translations.

But even if that is not true there are the Ten Commands that are beyond error—

You do not limit your exegesis to the Ten Commandments. That you do well when there is little ambiguity does not cure your problem of doing poorly when there is a lot of ambiguity.

People accuse me of lying because they do not understand prophecy...

No, they accuse you of lying because you say things that are demonstrably untrue. There is no magical "prophecy" that only you understand and which you can forever hold over your critics' head as proof of your alleged superiority.

I understand the simplicity of the perfect will of the Creator...

No, you engage in no more noble an activity than the exegetical squabbling that every other Christian sect engages in. You are simply a sect of one, and you do it worse than others because they at least incorporate secular understanding and some modicum of sound reasoning into their claims. You simply demand that you are holy and infallible and expect people to take you at that word.

The meaning is that Yahweh has condemned those who commit adultery.

The Torah contains many proscriptions, with which a number of them you do not comply. Your excuses for not obeying them are no different from the excuses given by people you write off as untrue and unfaithful in their beliefs. You claim to be holier than everyone else, but your actions show you are not.

 

[Agatha]

The Mod sent many posts to the outer darkness, and bade all participants to refrain from calling each other stupid, lest they incur the wrath of Mod which would be expressed in cards of finest yellow.

And the Mod looked upon her work, and saw that it was good.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha

 

[halleyscomet]

The Mod sent many posts to the outer darkness, and bade all participants to refrain from calling each other stupid, lest they incur the wrath of Mod which would be expressed in cards of finest yellow.

And the Mod looked upon her work, and saw that it was good.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Agatha

And lo, the faithful saw the wisdom of the moderator's decree and did repent of their errors, seeking to avoid repeating their mistakes in the future. Those who were not faithful and yet were still wise thought, "Jinkees. I should be careful or I'll get suspended."

And civility was maintained on the forum.

 

[Paul Bethke]

This does not mean they're still not better than a further translation.

I am not saying that all translations are reliable, but what can be deduced is that a comparison between the translations can be done.

What evidence do you have that your critics have not done this, as you assumed?

Well it does not always seem to be the case—but is it not that most of my valuable critics do not believe what took place in the beginning?

You didn't address the point. It is a matter of documented fact that you do not choose good translations, that you wrongly suppose things about the original text that you infer only from translations, and that you have made factual errors about what the text actually says because you rely upon bad translations.

Not so, begin at the beginning then all Scriptures can be understood, then progressively compare the Scriptures with what is stated. As one progresses, it becomes clear what the meaning is, because in many situations the historical events are referred to, like in many occasions there is reference to Abraham, and the patriarchs.
Jesus refers to the beginning--- Mat 19:4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'

What is clearly stated that if any translation or commentary does not agree with the Torah, then one must consider it false. A comprehensive knowledge of the Torah is required to enable a person to decipher the prophecy contained in the Scriptures.

For instance--- Rev 15:3 and sang the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb: "Great and marvelous are your deeds, Lord God Almighty. Just and true are your ways, King of the ages.
Rev 15:4 Who will not fear you, O Lord, and bring glory to your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship before you, for your righteous acts have been revealed."
Rev 15:5 After this I looked and in heaven the temple, that is, the tabernacle of the Testimony, was opened.

So to understand this prophetic statements, one must refer to the Torah.
The Apostle Paul confirms this--- Rom 2:20 b since in the Torah you have the embodiment of knowledge and truth;

You do not limit your exegesis to the Ten Commandments. That you do well when there is little ambiguity does not cure your problem of doing poorly when there is a lot of ambiguity.

The Ten Commands were the words that Yahweh spoke and that were chronicled on the two stone tablets, which Moses broke and Yahweh again inscribed them on similar tablets that Moses provided.

These commands are the very basis of the faith, they are not ambiguous, but very clear, and they are the starting point for every person. They were the means by which Yahweh judged Israel and they will be the basis of judgement for all people.

No, they accuse you of lying because you say things that are demonstrably untrue. There is no magical "prophecy" that only you understand and which you can forever hold over your critics' head as proof of your alleged superiority.

Jesus made a statement that applies to my valued critics--- Mat_22:29 Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.

To know the Scriptures is not to be able to read the Scriptures—but to understand what one is reading, to do this one must be able to understand the practical application of Scripture.
But taking into account what Jesus stated, would be beyond the ability of a common person to grasp.--- Luke_8:10 He said, "The knowledge of the secrets of the Kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, "'though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.'

Now these secrets refer to the strategy by which the Kingdom of God will be established here on earth in the END times. But this is all prophetic.

No, you engage in no more noble an activity than the exegetical squabbling that every other Christian sect engages in. You are simply a sect of one, and you do it worse than others because they at least incorporate secular understanding and some modicum of sound reasoning into their claims. You simply demand that you are holy and infallible and expect people to take you at that word.

Not so, I have applied the Scriptures to what I deduce from them—everything I have stated is supported by Scripture—I would be false if I could not prove my deduction.

The Torah contains many proscriptions, with which a number of them you do not comply. Your excuses for not obeying them are no different from the excuses given by people you write off as untrue and unfaithful in their beliefs. You claim to be holier than everyone else, but your actions show you are not.

You are wrong, every law has an application, it was written to teach the Hebrews how to conduct their affairs as a nation. It was a means to separate them from the customs of the heathen nations that they would encounter. The Hebrews would be a beacon for all nations to follow.
The laws were the means to enable the Hebrews to project other laws based on the initial laws, as we do today. So many of the laws in society have an ingredient of those laws.
The fact is not to eradicate any law, but to see how many of these laws are currently in society.
So, a comparison can be made, but the Ten Commands will always be where to begin.
The law is used to highlight what is sin, and faith is to abide by these laws.
This being the case we proceed with the DO NOTS.

Do not lie.
Do not steal.
Do not commit adultery.
So what is adultery, Jesus explains this in this way-- Mat 5:27 "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'
Mat 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart..
Then there is the physical understanding--- Luk 16:18 "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
So now all who hear what Jesus decreed will know what state they are in, and will be given an opportunity to repent.

You SEE it is the Creator who gives laws to make people holy (separate from other cultures and practices) So it would not be of any benefit to ignore the slightest command, every command has an application.

So I am not against any law.

 

[Border Reiver]

Jay Utah wrote:

The Torah contains many proscriptions, with which a number of them you do not comply. Your excuses for not obeying them are no different from the excuses given by people you write off as untrue and unfaithful in their beliefs. You claim to be holier than everyone else, but your actions show you are not.

You are wrong, every law has an application, it was written to teach the Hebrews how to conduct their affairs as a nation. It was a means to separate them from the customs of the heathen nations that they would encounter. The Hebrews would be a beacon for all nations to follow.
The laws were the means to enable the Hebrews to project other laws based on the initial laws, as we do today. So many of the laws in society have an ingredient of those laws.
The fact is not to eradicate any law, but to see how many of these laws are currently in society.
So, a comparison can be made, but the Ten Commands will always be where to begin.
The law is used to highlight what is sin, and faith is to abide by these laws.
This being the case we proceed with the DO NOTS.

Do not lie.
Do not steal.
Do not commit adultery.
So what is adultery, Jesus explains this in this way-- Mat 5:27 "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'
Mat 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart..
Then there is the physical understanding--- Luk 16:18 "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
So now all who hear what Jesus decreed will know what state they are in, and will be given an opportunity to repent.

You SEE it is the Creator who gives laws to make people holy (separate from other cultures and practices) So it would not be of any benefit to ignore the slightest command, every command has an application.

So I am not against any law.

You really have a problem actually responding to what is actually said.

Jay rather correctly indicated that you pick and choose which of the Laws you follow - the same as any other religious person - and provide excuses for not doing so in a similar fashion, all the while announcing yourself to be holy and a devout follower of the laws.

Your answer addresses exactly 0(zero) parts of this observation. You fail again to provide a cogent, logical reason for following some of the laws of general application, but not all of them.

You demonstrate your hypocrisy and proclivity for gaslighting again.

 

[abaddon]

I am not saying that all translations are reliable, but what can be deduced is that a comparison between the translations can be done.

Well it does not always seem to be the case—but is it not that most of my valuable critics do not believe what took place in the beginning?

Not so, begin at the beginning then all Scriptures can be understood, then progressively compare the Scriptures with what is stated. As one progresses, it becomes clear what the meaning is, because in many situations the historical events are referred to, like in many occasions there is reference to Abraham, and the patriarchs.
Jesus refers to the beginning--- Mat 19:4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'

What is clearly stated that if any translation or commentary does not agree with the Torah, then one must consider it false. A comprehensive knowledge of the Torah is required to enable a person to decipher the prophecy contained in the Scriptures.

For instance--- Rev 15:3 and sang the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb: "Great and marvelous are your deeds, Lord God Almighty. Just and true are your ways, King of the ages.
Rev 15:4 Who will not fear you, O Lord, and bring glory to your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship before you, for your righteous acts have been revealed."
Rev 15:5 After this I looked and in heaven the temple, that is, the tabernacle of the Testimony, was opened.

So to understand this prophetic statements, one must refer to the Torah.
The Apostle Paul confirms this--- Rom 2:20 b since in the Torah you have the embodiment of knowledge and truth;


The Ten Commands were the words that Yahweh spoke and that were chronicled on the two stone tablets, which Moses broke and Yahweh again inscribed them on similar tablets that Moses provided.

These commands are the very basis of the faith, they are not ambiguous, but very clear, and they are the starting point for every person. They were the means by which Yahweh judged Israel and they will be the basis of judgement for all people.


Jesus made a statement that applies to my valued critics--- Mat_22:29 Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.

To know the Scriptures is not to be able to read the Scriptures—but to understand what one is reading, to do this one must be able to understand the practical application of Scripture.
But taking into account what Jesus stated, would be beyond the ability of a common person to grasp.--- Luke_8:10 He said, "The knowledge of the secrets of the Kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, "'though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.'

Now these secrets refer to the strategy by which the Kingdom of God will be established here on earth in the END times. But this is all prophetic.


Not so, I have applied the Scriptures to what I deduce from them—everything I have stated is supported by Scripture—I would be false if I could not prove my deduction.

You are wrong, every law has an application, it was written to teach the Hebrews how to conduct their affairs as a nation. It was a means to separate them from the customs of the heathen nations that they would encounter. The Hebrews would be a beacon for all nations to follow.
The laws were the means to enable the Hebrews to project other laws based on the initial laws, as we do today. So many of the laws in society have an ingredient of those laws.
The fact is not to eradicate any law, but to see how many of these laws are currently in society.
So, a comparison can be made, but the Ten Commands will always be where to begin.
The law is used to highlight what is sin, and faith is to abide by these laws.
This being the case we proceed with the DO NOTS.

Do not lie.
Do not steal.
Do not commit adultery.
So what is adultery, Jesus explains this in this way-- Mat 5:27 "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'
Mat 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart..
Then there is the physical understanding--- Luk 16:18 "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
So now all who hear what Jesus decreed will know what state they are in, and will be given an opportunity to repent.

You SEE it is the Creator who gives laws to make people holy (separate from other cultures and practices) So it would not be of any benefit to ignore the slightest command, every command has an application.

So I am not against any law.

How do you cut/trim/maintain your hair and beard? No temple is required to obey those commands, right?

How about your clothing? No temple required for that either.