sotto voce

In Matthew 25, was Jesus speaking about good works as means of justification, or as effects of justification?

Onias

It is clear he was speaking of specific good works. Not all who claim to believe in Jesus demonstrate their faith by their works.

Sheshbazzar

Exodus 12:48 has nothing to do with getting 'right' with Yahweh.

It is a command that maintains the Scripturally enjoined wall of separation between Israel and the Gentiles.
Strangers (Gentiles) could live peacefully along with Israel, and they were most welcome even to join with Israel in offering up praise and thanks to Yahh.
But were restricted as Gentiles only from the eating of the Passover seder, although they were free to be present, and within the house to respect that Holy night, and to join in Israel's Leyl Shemorim -the all night vigil- of the fourteenth night of Abib. (Ex 12:42)
(Gentiles were present, and were safe within the Jews blood marked houses on that first Passover, they simply could not eat of that restricted Paska meal.)

If a Gentile chose, they could become circumcised, and thenceforth be free to eat of the seder, being through circumcision now of the household of Israel, and thus no longer of the Strangers (Gentiles) becoming thereby Jews themselves, and subject to all of the Laws applying to Jews.
But there was never any Scriptural obligation nor requirement to do this, as the believing Gentiles already held a special status, with its own set of promises apart from the Law. As is also confirmed in the Prophets. No one need ever be circumcised or become a Jew to enjoy the promises that Yahh-Yahweh made to the Nations (Gentiles) that believe upon and praise His Holy Name.

Sheshbazzar

The Torah tells us the reason; To raise up a people and a nation for His Name, Set apart by a set of Laws distinct from all the other nations of the earth.
The Law of the Covenant was given to separate Israel from all other nations.

And these other nations (the 'Gentiles') were not the recipients of that separating Law, nor subject to the 'touch not, eat not, handle not' strictures of that Law.
Thus a Jew was forbidden by Law to eat of any animal that died naturally, but it was perfectly acceptable for that Jew to give that carcass to his Gentile servant (within his gates) or sell it to any foreigner (outside his gates) who were free (from The Law) to eat of it (Deut 14:21)

semiopen

Your analysis assumes that there was actually some theological significance in superstitious behavior.

All of your arguments turn into crap if any of the previous stuff is false.

For example, almost all ancient people sacrificed animals to their gods to ensure the well being of the people or whatever.

In Judah, this eventually evolved into the temple service. Some people will claim that the temple service actually worked as opposed to the various pagan iterations, but allow me to suggest that it was total bullshit.

It is a law of the universe that you can't add bullshit to bullshit and get something that is not bullshit.

The Messiah is an obscure concept. This might be more sophisticated than giving your first born son to Moloch, but I doubt that aside from not going through the aggravation of killing an important family member there are any tangible benefits of one belief over the other.

Onias

I just happened to notice that Gen 15:6 is not the basis of any of the 613 commandments of the Torah.

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

semiopen

613 is sort of a theoretical number. If I was going to bet on this, my choice would be that there are not exactly 613 commandments...maybe if we included "Fuck Jesus."

Having said that, I'm puzzled why Gen 15:6 could by any stretch of the imagination be considered a commandment. Maybe I missed something - I'm not even clear on why Gen 15:6 might be mistranslated.

sotto voce

The most significant parts of the Bible seem to be the most susceptible to mistranslation, for some reason.

Onias

Could it be that mistranslated verses are most often those that support Xian theology?

Toto

a digression has been split off here