Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Responding to Derek Leman on the Idea That Torah Can Be Divided Into Moral and Non-Moral Laws

Just read Derek's post from 10/27/14 entitled "Moral Law, Revealed Torah, Noah" (LINK).

The idea that Torah can be divided into Moral and non-Moral laws is ridiculous.  All one needs to do is stop for just a moment to define the term "moral."  Simply put, a moral is a "good."  But obviously when man tries to decide on his own what is good (what is "moral") without reference to an objective standard (i.e. Revealed Torah), the result is moral relativism.

So you must have the Revealed Torah.  But, according to Derek, Gentiles must pick out only the Moral laws--those are the only laws binding on Gentiles.

So a Gentile must divide Torah into good and non-good laws?  Absurd!

Why isn't anyone calling him out on this absurdity?


  1. I would like to see the idiot give us a list of the "moral laws" and a list of the " immoral laws..."

  2. Ha!

    By the way, after writing this post I realized that you have actually called him out on this in the past. I just wish more people were saying something given that he's Chair of the UMJC Educational Committee (or something to that effect).

  3. The other thing that makes no sense which I'll bring up in a separate post is this idea of "Sign Commandments" or "Identity Markers" (Kinbar calls them "Social Identity Markers"). All of Torah separates Am Yisrael as holy--virtually every mitzvah is a social identity marker. Yet the UMJC types say that Gentiles are supposed to mentally divide out the commands that are social identifiers vs. non-social-identifiers and only keep the moral commands that are not social identifiers? Absurd...

  4. Moral laws... A twisted version of Christendom's (Christendumb's?) three fold division of the Law, assigning parts to Jews and other parts not for Gentiles... Same song, different verse.

    I just read and posted a link to Tim Hegg's online paper/book: 'Is the Torah Only for the Jews?' It is just another surgical destruction of the nonsense from the bilateralists. One nice feature is chapter 6, a book by book overview of the NT and their relative angle and argument for Gentile Torah observance.

  5. Speaking out of both sides of their mouths... either the Torah applies to gentiles who trust in Yeshua or it does not... You can't have it both ways. The only way a gentile had any responsibility to the Torah outside of covenant status, was in direct relation to Israel's jurisdiction, something which is not applicable today. The Law of Moses is contained within a covenant, you can't willy nilly throw around a few commandments to apply to gentiles, unless they fit under the categories I labeled above, a gentile who is in covenant, and thus is responsible to keep the Torah, or a gentile who enters the land and is thus under the jurisdiction of Israel, thus must obey the "Laws of the Land"... This dissecting of the Law of Moses is illegitimate, and uneducated.

    *Basic Theology 101*

  6. Well said, TunaCakes. : )