I see it this way - a child comes to know his parents first and foremost from his direct experience of his parents' love. Rules only become important when he is big enough to implement and understand them, and he can see that they are indeed an expression of love because they create a protective hedge.

There has to be a right order and a right balance. In truth rules are gradually introduced from a young age. When the first gentiles were converted, the Council of Jerusalem ordered their immediate obedience of some of Torah with the intention that they would follow the rest later. I have written about this in one of my recent sermons - http://nccg.org/mlt/sermons

I know of few people who came to Torah first (unless they were already Torah-observant Jews). And I can think of few people who would even want to listen to Torah before they come to love and know the Torah-giver. Go and try it. Advertise some Torah classes to unbelievers. People need more than head-knowledge. And the ONLY way to come to the Father now - under the terms of the New Covenant - is through Yah'shua. In other words, people won't convert to YHWH before they convert to Yah'shua. And that's the whole point. The Old Covenant is gone. We have a brand New Covenant and it all starts with Yah'shua.

That's why the evangelicals are right. They are serving the right milk which everyone needs to start with. Their problem is they serve rotten meat.

Yah'shua first, Torah next.

We seem to be in complete agreement as to the direction and sequence of emunah-faith and Torah-works. I am not sure I would see grace as a 'reward' because it is by definition YHWH's unmerited favour - His undeserved loving kindness which is bestowed not as a response to anything we do but as an initiatory action all on its own. Thus YHWH's intervention on behalf of Sha'ul/Paul on the road to Damascus, which was not because of an iota of faith on Sha'uls part, is properly seen as grace - Sha'ul had no part of it.

But then perhaps you have some other connotation in mind inasmuch as grace so intimately involved other subjects like forgiveness, regeneration. repentance and YHWH's own love, with which they are, in a very real sense, inseparably connected. My own view is that grace evolved into a two-way word (YHWH and man's mutual initiatives) viâ Martin Luther who rendered the Hebrew hesed (mercy/grace) into the German Gnade which is definitely bidirectional. I don't think Luther was strictly accurate, introducing a sense which isn't there. And the German sense has since passed into English (a Germanic language).

However there is, I think, a second legitimate sense of hesed which might better fit your definition, though it still isn't exactly 'grace'. In referring to YHWH is certainly implies grace - undeserved loving-kindness - but when used of man there is a definite association with b'rit/covenant and denotes an attitude of faithfulness which, of course, both parties of a covenant should observe. Examples of the two types of hesed would be La.3:22 (for YHWH) and Hos.6:1 (for man). As far as the latter is concerned, covenant-love best expresses the idea of hesed.

The other 'grace' word in Hebrew is hen which is definitely not a covenant word and not two-way. This completely fits the traditionally-understood grace model of Protestantism - of the total unmerited favour of YHWH toward man. Examples would be Gen.33:8,10,15; 39:4; Ruth 2:2,10. YHWH's hen is also found in Jer.31:2. No-one can therefore show hen to YHWH, because no one can do Him a favour.

So perhaps you were speaking of hesed-type grace.

The reason why I am using some time on this is because Yochanan/John 1:17 puts Torah into sharp antithesis with grace. This has led to major misunderstandings and an unnecessary split between evangelicals and messianics. Also see Titus 2:11 which states that grace came into the world with Yah'shua. What tends to happen is that the Protestant-Evangelicals unconsciously rush to hen to define their grace and the Messianics to hesed when it comes to intepreting the New Testament. But both propositions are true. There is no distinction between hesed and hen in Greek just as English fails to makes distinctions between different kinds of love in Greek (charis, agapé, philia, eros, etc.). And so all the doctrinal misunderstandings and controversies arise. Martin Luther admitted that he did not know Hebrew, only Greek, so little wonder the Great Reformer had a lopsided view of some critical issues:


From Lutheran misunderstandings come the idea that grace and law are somehow antithetical, and that's reflected in their New Testament translations into German and English. They aren't. Grace was very definitely present in the Old Testament but the difference between the Old and the New is that grace is in the foreground in the New whereas it is in the background in the Old. That doesn't mean there are two different 'graces' - it simple means that grace is the object of focus in the New precisely because it has its most concrete expression and revelation in the voluntary sacrifice of our Messiah Yah'shua. Hallelu-Yah!

There is one other important consideration in this discussion on grace which is something we like to emphasise in our ministry because it tends to get lost in Messianic discussions, and it is a principle taught emphatically in Ephesians and Hebrews, namely, that hen-grace came before hesed-grace which came before Torah. This is so vital to understand if we are to be in right relationship with YHWH and with each other that it deserves to be thoroughly underlined and repeated until we understand it and have everything in correct perspective:

• 1. Undeserved loving-kindness, unmerited favour from YHWH to man (hen);
• 2. Covenant love (man) > kindness and mercy (YHWH) (hesed);
• 3. Torah-obedience by man as an expression of love for YHWH's hen and hesed and a natural fruit of being saved by Yah'shua.

Thus the Torah was never primary .- and when it becomes so, it becomes idolatrous and legalistic. That is one reason I do not like the RSTNE rendition of Yochanan/John 1:1 which makes a tertiary aspect into something primary:


This makes Torah out to be God/Elohim. Not only is this without textual warranty (if Yochanan/John had meant Torah he would have used the word Torah - but he didn't - he used davar/logos meaning 'word'). This reminds me of the shocking translation by the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith in his "Inspired" version of the Bible (he used no original manuscripts - just claimed revelation from the 'Holy Ghost') - in which he interposes his own interpretation:


Appalling, I know you'll agree, which is why the RSTNE sent red lights off in my head. Certainly the Torah is an aspect of dabar but it is not the davar. We know davar is correct because the Aramaic (Old Syriac and Peshitta) does not use 'tôra'.

I mention this to illustrate how we can insert out own biases into scripture translation if we are not rigorous. Enthusiasm is not enough - there has to be impartial scholarship. Evangelical and Messianic translators have their in-built biases - evangelicals have hen-grace on the brain and messianics are obsessed with Torah. They're both there but they are neither competing with each other nor are they mutually exclusive. We must have the correct sense and proper balance or we will end up with a lopsided besorah/gospel resulting in never-ending schism.

Finally, another nuance which must not be missed - grace is in Torah itself. How? The election of Israel to be YHWH's people is always atrributed in Torah to YHWH's free choice, not to Israel's righteousness! (see Dt.7:7-8; cp. 8:18) There is NO CAUSE FOR ISRAEL BOASTING. She isn't "teacher's pet" because she's done anything good of herself.She hasn't. She's as miserable and wicked as the gentiles. She has what she has only because of hen-grace - YHWH's undeserved loving kindness, His unmerited favour.

Sadly, Judah has not paid attention and adopted a lot of this mentality of superiority. We take grave risks and can easily slip into idolatry if we start elevating Judah in any way, something which Judah herself encourages and which Ephraim falls for time and time again because he senses his lack of knowledge of Torah which Judah has. But Ephtaim is learning Torah now and discovering that Judah is not what she makes herself out to be necessarily. Let us remind ourselves of the true position and spiritual status of both tribes:


Who has taught us the lie that only Israel (Ephtaim) committed adultery and was divorced? That Judah is still YHWH's metaphorical wife? The Scripture is very plain - BOTH committed adultery, BOTH were divorced and yet backsliding Israel showed herself to be what? MORE RIGHTEOUS THAN JUDAH because Judah made a PRETENSE at being righteous! Israel (Ephraim) was at least honest about her wickedness and didn't try to pretend to be 'religious' as Judah did, and still does.

This is one myth we have been called to expose. Judah does not have some exalted position. Both she and Ephraim have what they have because of grace alone.

Let's dismantle the myths and expose all pretentiousness, get on our knees and acknowledge that both tribes only have what they have because of YHWH's undeserved loving kindness. We're all ultimately dust.

It should be obvious, therefore, that grace comes before Torah - every time.

The Love of YAHUSHUA is what has allowed me to experience True Love. This is the Foundation Stone of my life. He has been soooo patient with me! I am surely far from perfect as of yet but am growing day by day. It is this loving patience that has brought me to this place of fellowship as well as my current practice of His ways. Sometimes I have suffered because of my sins but He has always been there to help me get up. That's real love! I am not too Tov with showing it like He has but have gotten the idea in my brain at least. A thick head is hard to penetrate without shattering it! Now that this is in my head it will work into my heart as He has said. Faith comes by hearing first. Even Trees can grow from rocks and even cement, it takes time but they can grow there and when they are left to grow they will help to break up the old foundations of our lives. We need to find balance. The most important thing in leading others into Torah is to try to show the unconditional Love of Moschiach. To truly help others without being an enabler to further sin is a hard task. We must accomplish it. May YAHUSHUA grants us this ability.
Yohs

Shalom Brother Dale ... and this is written in love too :)

Mercy + (Faith + Works) = Grace seems like a tautology to me, for are not mercy and grace words expressing the same compassionate treatment towards an offender on behalf of the one offended?

Torah is the boundary after grace where such a boundary is needed - which is in almost all cases. But it's the obvious cases where it isn't needed that strike me the hardest and remind me of roots:

1. The repentant thief on the Cross ... followed Yah'shua into Paradise the same day and was unable to claim any works whatsoever - he merely had emunah-faith;

2. The Creation of the heavens and the world and everything we have had, have, and ever will have is ultimately because of grace - we earned none of it. It was all here long before we appeared.

Our works are ultimately but grateful expressions of love even though they do afford us fatherly protection from harm - they are not part of the equation of YHWH's loving kindness, otherwise we would be claiming a stake in what it means to be Elohim.

To my way of thinking to couple our works to His grace is to inject a lethal dose of pride. All His rewards are His grace too, as Yah'shua taught in respect of the labourers who were hired late in the day - they were content to trust the Hirer's grace - there was no index-linked salvation then and I absolutely don't believe there is any now, or ever.

Does this mean I shall pick and choose whether to obey Torah or not? Absolutely not. My obedience is my love-expression, not my anticipation of inevitable reward, because agapé love does not anticipate reward - it lives in pure grace. That is the difference, IMHO, between those who already have their reward (having the notice and praises of men) and those who do (because like the late labourers, they have absolute confidence in the fairness of the Master).

Amazing grace, how sweet the sound (indeed), that saved a wretch like me.

________

Ephraim and Judah

If the penalty for a crime (like divorce) is defined by various actions which make it a crime, then then we know that a divorce has been served by the example(s) which went before.

Judah committed the same divorce-crimes as Ephraim and indeed did worse, YHWH said and as you conceed. If the same crime is committed by two parties and the punishment for one of the parties is divorce, then the punishment for the other party is the same - or YHWH is not accounted just.

Both Israel and Judah received the same punishment - exile from the Land. Both intermingled with the nations. When the King (Yah'shua) came, the Nation of Judah rejected the King and therefore the Kingdom. She became citizenless (husbandless) like Ephraim before her. The 'kingdom' remaining to Judah was antichrist/antimessiah - therefore she was cut off from YHWH, for as it is written, "No man comes to the Father but by Me (Yah'shua)". To be cut off is not to be a bride.

This is further verified by the conditions for becoming the Bride of Messiah. Emunah-faith is not, clearly, enough - a bride must be obedient to the Law-Giver. But if the law-Giver and His salvation/grace are rejected, then they are disobedient to every point of Torah too - for to reject the First and Great Commandment (rejecting Yahweh-shua) is also to reject the rest of the Torah, no matter how faithfully you may be keeping it.

There never was a Bride without the Bridegroom.

John 3:29
He who has the bride is the bridegroom
NKJV

Judah (as a nation) never had the Bridegroom therefore ceased being the Bride after her final rejection at the Cross and diaspora that followed.

Torah does not come before, or substitute for the Messiah - ever. Judah rejected the Torah-giver. Therefore the Bridegroom's Laws were useless to her in her wandering.

A woman may not remarry, according to Old Covenant Torah, until her husband dies. Israel and Judah could not remarry until their original Husband, YHWH-shua, died on the Cross. That was the means by which both wives were re-purchased ... by the Blood of the Lamb.

If your thesis is true, then Yah'shua did not purchase back Judah or her individual parts because she was already saved! Your thesis then becomes one of a Jewish Master Race not in need of a Blood-Redeemer because YHWH never divorced her. Then Messiah becomes a secondary issue to be "tacked on" later.

The testimony of the B'rit Chadashah Scriptures is that ALL (Ephraim and Judah and the Gentiles) have sinned and fallen short of the glory of Elohim and all are redeemed on exactly the same terms irrespective of their national or Torah backgrounds. It all begins and ends with Yah'shua. New Covenant Torah sandwiches inbetween. Any other doctrine is a proclamation of two salvations, an inferior and a superior for an inferior and superior race, respectively. Yet we have seen they were no different - and the one who held out longest turned out to be worst because of hypocrisy.

If your wife abandoned you and took up with another man but otherwise obeyed all the other Torah rules, would she still be married? No.

Yah'shua told those Jews who rejected Him that their Father was not YHWH but the father of all lies ... even though they followed Torah minutely (in most instances).

In the end, no one has any merit - it's all Yah'shua's.

If your postulate is correct, then this is the scenario: two gospels and two messiahs.

Baruch haShem YHWH

I wonder. We are admonished to come to Him as a "little child" in trust, faith and innocence. But when we draw near, then it is we sense the sin in our lives, and need to repent before we turn around and walk away. But I guess the "coming" can also be viewed as repentance - of turning around from the world's solutions. Certainly to remain life is a continuous series of repentances - of remaining "turned around".