PDA

View Full Version : Old & New Covenants



Buck shot
Jun 10th 2008, 03:53 PM
From another thread:

His death signaled the end of the old covenant;
his resurrection signaled the beginning of the new.


Many say this...so :hmm:

What is the old covenant?

What is the new covenant?

grit
Jun 10th 2008, 04:29 PM
Covenant theology is sometimes equated with Reformed theology, and basically overviews a strong continuity between the Old Testament (Covenant) and the New Testament (Covenant) in how God has always worked with his chosen people through the covenants He has made with them in covenant toward the revelation of their redemption. It is a systematic approach to understanding how the whole of Scripture fits together.

Here are some helpful links, though I've not included the "covenant theology" wiki link due to too many errors in its presentation. It is important to understand that even within the broader umbrella of Covenant theology, there are significant differences in various aspects of belief and presentation:

http://www.theopedia.com/Covenant_Theology (http://www.theopedia.com/Covenant_Theology) (a good basic overview)
http://members.aol.com/rbiblech/MiscDoctrine/DispCov.htm (http://members.aol.com/rbiblech/MiscDoctrine/DispCov.htm) (a general comparison chart with dispensationalism, to which covenant theology is often contrasted)
http://www.oggclan.us/church/theochrt.htm (http://www.oggclan.us/church/theochrt.htm) (another helpful snapshot chart, generally mapping denominational placement, though not without error)

Buck shot
Jun 10th 2008, 04:38 PM
I started this thread so I get to set the rules on this one.

Rule #1- No links to what others say the covenants are. If you like a link, read it and then give us the short version of what YOU believe God has taught you.

I want to know what some of the folks that through the new and old covenants around believe is differant and the scriptures they are trusting.

Reynolds357
Jun 10th 2008, 04:57 PM
The New Covenant did not replace the Old Covenant. The New Covenant fulfilled the Old Covenant. The only real differences between the covenant is the application of grace. In the Old Covenant, grace was given based on following the law and animal sacrifice. The New Covenant grace is given by faith and faith alone in our Savior. The promises of the Old Covenant are still valid in the New Covenant. The New Covenant is a better covenant due to the fact that grace is not dependant on our actions.

crawfish
Jun 10th 2008, 05:36 PM
The old covenant was God's promise to one group of people -the descendants of Abraham. It is tied up in Genesis 12:3:



"I will make you into a great nation
and I will bless you;
I will make your name great,
and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you."


I don't think it's any controversy to state that all mankind are "God's people". So why did God "choose" one people? I believe it's because God works in our world through people - he created a unified, unique nation in which His plan could grow and develop. That is what the law of Moses carried to a further level - they grown into a large nation, and the laws prescribed by Moses were to bind them together. The Sabbath, circumcision, the rejection of all other gods - these made the Israelites unique. It set them aside from all other nations around them and bound them together more tightly. Into this community, God placed into this nation scribes to record His words; prophets to challenge His people and to reveal the future; judges and kings to lead.

And what was the ultimate purpose of choosing one people? Israel was like a field that God was plowing, weeding, hoeing, removing rocks, fertilizing and such, to produce the perfect fruit. That fruit was Jesus Christ. When Christ died, he was "replanted" outside the field, essentially becoming a new covenant to the rest of the world.

And there lies the chief difference -the old covenant was with the descendants of Abraham - the new covenant, with all mankind. The covenant is based on grace rather than law. Christ's sacrifice has made that possible. While the NT does list rules and such - and reiterates all but one of the 10 commandments - obeying the rules is no longer what saves us. It is instead our belief.

matthew94
Jun 10th 2008, 05:40 PM
The Old Covenant was like a shadow. A shadow can help us imagine its source, but has severe limitations. A shadow contains accurate information, but has no independant power to act towards a desired end. A shadow fades when light is shined upon it. A shadow can be quite confusing until the source is revealed. The New Covenant shows the source of the shadow. It is unlimited, powerful & shines brightly.

John146
Jun 10th 2008, 05:43 PM
The New Covenant did not replace the Old Covenant. The New Covenant fulfilled the Old Covenant. The only real differences between the covenant is the application of grace. In the Old Covenant, grace was given based on following the law and animal sacrifice. The New Covenant grace is given by faith and faith alone in our Savior. The promises of the Old Covenant are still valid in the New Covenant. The New Covenant is a better covenant due to grace that is not dependant on our actions.

I have to disagree. Passages like the following indicate that the old covenant was taken away and replaced by a better covenant.

13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. - Heb 8:13

This verse doesn't say the new covenant fulfilled the old. It says it made the first covenant old (obsolete). Any traces of it were about to vanish away for good.

9Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. - Hebrews 10:9-10

Again, the new (second) covenant did not fulfill the old (first) covenant. Christ TOOK AWAY the first, old covenant so that He could establish the second, new covenant.

The old covenant "of ordinances that was against us" was nailed to the cross (Colossians 2:14). We are no longer under the law but under grace.

That the old covenant was replaced by the new covenant is also illustrated in the following passage:

22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
27For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
28Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. - Galatians 4:22-31

In this passage, the bondwoman represents the old covenant and the freewoman represents the new covenant. The bondwoman is cast out. We are not children of the bondwoman (old covenant) but of the free (new covenant).

grit
Jun 10th 2008, 07:24 PM
I started this thread so I get to set the rules on this one.

Rule #1- No links to what others say the covenants are. If you like a link, read it and then give us the short version of what YOU believe God has taught you.

I want to know what some of the folks that through the new and old covenants around believe is differant and the scriptures they are trusting.
Sorry, buck. Sure thing. Since you didn't link to the thread you quoted it's difficult for me to follow the context of what you're asking, looking for, or would have me comment on. Looks like I've jumped into the middle of a conversation you're interested in clarifying regarding those participants, so I'll just politely bow out. :hug:

Buck shot
Jun 10th 2008, 08:34 PM
Sorry, buck. Sure thing. Since you didn't link to the thread you quoted it's difficult for me to follow the context of what you're asking, looking for, or would have me comment on. Looks like I've jumped into the middle of a conversation you're interested in clarifying regarding those participants, so I'll just politely bow out. :hug:

No problem, I should have linked it. :idea:

I am interested in your opinion also!

JordanW
Jun 10th 2008, 08:34 PM
The Old Covenant was only between God and the Jewish people, and it was basically that he would give them the Promised land. The New Covenant came in to play when Jesus shed his blood on the Cross that forever took away our sins.

Reynolds357
Jun 10th 2008, 08:36 PM
I have to disagree. Passages like the following indicate that the old covenant was taken away and replaced by a better covenant.

13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. - Heb 8:13

This verse doesn't say the new covenant fulfilled the old. It says it made the first covenant old (obsolete). Any traces of it were about to vanish away for good.

9Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. - Hebrews 10:9-10

Again, the new (second) covenant did not fulfill the old (first) covenant. Christ TOOK AWAY the first, old covenant so that He could establish the second, new covenant.

The old covenant "of ordinances that was against us" was nailed to the cross (Colossians 2:14). We are no longer under the law but under grace.

That the old covenant was replaced by the new covenant is also illustrated in the following passage:

22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
27For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
28Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. - Galatians 4:22-31

In this passage, the bondwoman represents the old covenant and the freewoman represents the new covenant. The bondwoman is cast out. We are not children of the bondwoman (old covenant) but of the free (new covenant).

Matthew 5:17
The old covenant was fulfilled with the new covenant, a better covenant.

Buck shot
Jun 10th 2008, 08:43 PM
Okay, but what do you think the covenants are or were? Ya'll are saying there are two but what is covered by the first and what is covered by the second?

I think a lot of folks use these terms as an easy out. What do they mean to you?:hmm:

Buck shot
Jun 10th 2008, 08:45 PM
The Old Covenant was only between God and the Jewish people, and it was basically that he would give them the Promised land. The New Covenant came in to play when Jesus shed his blood on the Cross that forever took away our sins.

Where is the law in what you are seeing here? Did any of God's laws change?

Literalist-Luke
Jun 10th 2008, 11:54 PM
It has to do with one’s understanding of Dispensationalism. “Dispensationalism” is, of course, the idea that God’s approach in dealing with humankind has been a gradually developing process in which the rules “change” occasionally, going from one “dispensation” to another. Two prominent examples of occasions when the rules supposedly “changed” would be the giving of the Ten Commandments, which initiated the Mosaic Covenant, and Christ’s death/resurrection, which made the so-called “Church Age” possible. (There are other examples in Biblical history, these are only two of them.)

The argument used most often is that the beginning of the Church Age, or “New Covenant”, supposedly necessitated the end of the Mosaic Covenant (“Old Covenant”) in which God’s dealing with humans was primarily through Israel. The Mosaic Covenant is now over (supposedly) and God is now dealing primarily through the Church. The reasoning this leads to about the Rapture is that when the Rapture occurs, membership in the Church is cut off, meaning that the “rules” that apply during the Church Age can no longer be in effect, necessitating a reversion back to the Mosaic Covenant rules and a change of God’s focus from the Church to Israel. This argument is most often used in support of the Pre-Trib position, since God said in Daniel 9:26-27 that there would be so many “sevens” for Israel and, as most of us would agree, there is still one “seven” left to go. Therefore, since God supposedly cannot be dealing with Israel and the Church simultaneously, the Church must be gone by the time that final seven years begins.

Some problems with this line of reasoning are as follows:

1. The suggestion that God “cannot” deal with two groups at once is ridiculous. God can do whatever He durn well pleases. There is nothing in Scripture that makes it impossible for God to deal with more than one group at a time. In fact, as we will see in a moment, there are actually Scriptures that specifically indicate that He does indeed deal with more than one group at once today at this very moment!

2. Even a Pre-Tribber/Dispensationalist would agree that Israel’s national salvation depends on their final acceptance as a nation of Jesus not only as their Messiah, but also as their Savior. Therefore, the “rules” of the Mosaic Covenant are not in effect, at least certainly not in their original form (which would beg the question, what other changes can we expect? to which a reasonable answer does not seem possible without useless random speculation and guesswork). There was no Jesus during the Old Testament that Israel had to accept, so the Mosaic Covenant’s rules therefore cannot be re-applied. There’s no going back.

3. It seems foolish to suggest that every single Gentile on the entire planet who remains after the Rapture (unless it is literally a Post-Trib Rapture) has absolutely no further opportunity for salvation. This would mean that God’s focus will not be exclusively on Israel. In fact, even Pre-Tribbers agree that Gentiles will be saved (by the billions, is what Pre-Tribbers usually say) during the Tribulation! That sets up a contradiction in a Pre-Trib Dispensationalist’s position. They say that God will be dealing only with Israel, but then they say there will be billions of Gentile converts. So which is it?? If the rules of the Mosaic Covenant make a comeback after the Rapture, how do all these Gentiles get saved?

4. Hebrews 10:1 tells us that the Mosaic sacrifices were never intended to achieve true justification before God for Israel. They were only a “shadow”.

Hebrews 10:1 – “The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship.”

Ultimately, even the Old Testament saints are dependent on Christ’s death on the cross for their salvation, even if they were not aware during their lifetime of the specifics of precisely how their salvation was won for them by God. For God, this is no problem since He sees all of history occurring simultaneously, including history that is still future from our point of view, so to Him when Old Testament saints died, Christ’s death was an already-accomplished fact since He was “slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8). This being the case, Christ’s death is the only reason that anybody ever gets into Heaven all the way from Adam & Eve all the way through until the end of the Millennial Kingdom. The procedures and rules for what believers of each period were expected to do changed, yes, but the means of salvation has always been Christ’s death ever since that first bite from the forbidden fruit. Without Christ’s death on the cross, there would be no salvation for anybody at any time in all of history, no can do, no sir, no how, do not pass Go, do not collect $200. God even specified that Jesus’ death would be the key event when he said at Genesis 3:15:

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”, which most prophecy students would agree is the first prophecy of the coming Messiah/Savior. If Jesus had not died on the cross, there would be no salvation for anybody throughout all of history and every single human in all of history would be doomed, no matter how many sacrifices we kill on the alter, no matter how many “wave” offerings we bring to the Temple, no matter how many “arks” we build, no matter how many times we prove that we are willing to sacrifice our Isaacs on an alter. It would all be for nothing were it not for Jesus’ death on that cross.

So the means of salvation has never changed, ever. As a matter of fact, the Mosaic Covenant is STILL in effect today and we are still living under it! Now before you start accusing me of being a Judiadizing legalist, I’ll point out that we live in a time when the Mosaic Covenant has been fulfilled on our behalf by Christ’s perfect, sinless life, and we are therefore not bound by its rules, just as Paul went to great lengths to explain in Romans and Galatians, among other places. Because Christ paid a price for us that He didn’t owe for Himself, we don’t have to worry about the Mosaic Law, because Christ fulfilled it for us. The Law is still in effect, but we can get out of it, so to speak, by claiming Christ’s death as our own. That’s why the apostles explain at great length that those who choose to live as being under the Law must obey the ENTIRE law or bring condemnation on themselves, because the Law is still in effect today.

James 2:10 – “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.”

If it wasn’t still in effect, then one cannot bring the Law’s condemnation on oneself by breaking even just one law and the apostles are liars. It’s just that you and I don’t have to worry about it, because we have been given judicial immunity because of Christ’s death and our acceptance of it on our behalf.

So the Mosaic Covenant is still in effect at this moment, although it has been fulfilled on our behalf by Jesus. This means that there has been no “shift” from the Mosaic Covenant to the “Church Age”. Rather, we are simply in a time where we have the opportunity to have the Mosaic Law not held against us because of Jesus. So what does this mean for the Rapture? It means that the Rapture will have NO EFFECT on who God is dealing with, because the people He is dealing with remains unchanged. He’s still dealing with Israel at this very moment as you are reading this, right now. They’re just not listening yet. In the meantime, we Gentiles are being “grafted in”.

There’s another problem with Dispensationalism that I’ll mention. Notice in Romans Chapter 1 that God is holding everyone throughout history in the entire world responsible for rejecting Him:

Romans 1:19-20 – “...what may be known about God is plain to them [humankind in general], because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”

Notice here that God is talking about a level of revelation that involves no Israel, no Mosaic sacrificial system, no Scriptures, and no Christ, only nature and the creation around us. God says we should know based only on His revelation of Himself in the creation around us. This is precisely the condition that existed up until Moses wrote the Pentateuch. And yet Paul is using it as a reason for God’s condemnation of the lost in the present, AFTER the start of the “Church Age”. “...what may be known about God IS plain to them...” “...so that people ARE without excuse.”

Here’s why that’s a problem – traditional Dispensationalism has one phase of God’s revelation replacing the previous one, all going sequentially in order. Romans Chapter 1 directly contradicts this. Romans Chapter 1 says the creation around us is sufficient justification for us to be condemned. But conversely, if that is the case it also has to mean that it is also sufficient information for us to receive salvation. That being the case, the only logical conclusion is that God’s phases of revelation do not replace each other, but rather are added on top of each other, each one clarifying the previous and giving us a better understanding of the issues at hand.

The highest level of revelation we have been given thus far is the combination of the completed Word of God along with the historical revelation of Christ Himself in the flesh when He visited the earth 2000 years ago. But that doesn’t mean that everything else before that simply gets thrown out with the bathwater. And neither does it mean that anybody today without knowledge of the actual name of “Jesus” is automatically condemned. There is enough information from the Creation around us for us to respond favorably to God or to reject Him, even if we don’t know His name in the process of making our choice.

Literalist-Luke
Jun 10th 2008, 11:57 PM
(I should also point out that this does not provide an “excuse” for us to not respond to Christ. We cannot say “Well, I don’t want to respond to Christ, but I can agree that the world around me was definitely created by an intelligent being, so I’ll just respond on that level.” Nope, sorry Charlie, you’re still condemned, because Christ was revealed to you and you are responsible to respond to the revelation that you were given.)

This is proof that it is indeed possible for God to deal with more than one group of people at a time. He is not restricted to dealing only with Israel or only with Gentiles.

So my point is that different phases of Dispensationalism do not cancel each other out, they simply clarify previous phases. It’s like adding layers on a cake. Each layer makes the cake better, because it adds more flavor, but the lower layers are still kept. The key is that we are all responsible for the level of revelation that we have been given.

So there is only one program for both Jew and Gentile, the death of Jesus on the cross. There will be only one body of redeemed people who were saved prior to Christ’s second coming. This will include Old and New Testament saints. “People will come from east and west and north and south, and will take their places at the feast in the kingdom of God.” (Luke 13:29). And again, “When Jesus heard this, he was amazed and said to those following him, ‘Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ ” (Matthew 8:10-12).

There is only one group, Israel with the Gentiles grafted in, both dependant on the same root, that root being Abraham’s faith being credited to him as “righteousness”, via the death of Christ on the cross, both parties, Israel and the Gentiles, being merged into one set of believers.

The “remnant of Israel” from throughout history IS the Olive Tree. There has always been a “remnant”, as God told Elijah when he ran from Jezebel in I Kings 19:18 – “I reserve seven thousand in Israel—all whose knees have not bowed down to Baal and whose mouths have not kissed him.” There was also a remnant in Jesus’ day which included the disciples plus His other followers, there is a remnant today, and there will be one at the end of the Tribulation. There has never “not” been a remnant. It will include the Jews who are saved at the 2nd Coming when they see “Him whom they have pierced”. Israel has never been set aside. They are still God’s chosen people. God still wants them to come into fellowship with Him even at this very moment, but since Christ has been revealed as the Passover Lamb, the procedures set down by Moses are outdated and no longer necessary. Jesus, the ultimate High Priest, has offered a sacrifice superior to those offered at the Jerusalem Temple so that no further sacrifice is needed for obtaining salvation. The Jews still have an open door in front of them just as they did in 69 AD. They just have to individually choose to walk through it, just as they could have in 69 AD. The way to walk through the door is to recognize Jesus as their national Messiah and as their personal Savior, which is precisely what we are called to do – to call on the name of the Lord. That includes Jesus as the Messiah and our Savior.

The destruction of 70 AD had a key result in God’s program of redemption: The Temple was destroyed, making carrying on with the Mosaic sacrifices impossible. That alone should give any devout Jew pause, that God would allow the destruction of Israel’s ability to carry out what they thought was His will. If God allowed that practice to be destroyed, then it must not be His will anymore, hmmmm? Which just goes along perfectly with the fact of Jesus having made the perfect, once-for-all sacrifice. So Israel still has an open door in front of them. Unfortunately, they won’t step through it as a nation until the end of the Tribulation. Some of them are stepping through it today, but most will hold out until they’re either dead or facing certain annihilation in Petra/Bosrah at the hands of the Antichrist/Mahdi, at which time all the teachings they will have been hearing from the Two Witnesses along with various other sources will finally get through their hard heads and they will finally acknowledge their mistake and say “Blessed is He Who comes in the name of the Lord.”, resulting in the 2nd Coming.

Now, in the meantime, we Gentiles are being grafted into the Olive Tree while Jewish branches are being broken off due to “unbelief”. We are part of the Church that was originally an Israeli organism.

The Greek word translated “Church” in the Bible is “ekklesia”. It means “a called out assembly.” It is found 112 times in the Greek New Testament. In all 112 cases, except Matthew 16:18, Acts 7:38, 1 Corinthians 10:32, Ephesians 1:22, Ephesians 3:10, Ephesians 5:23-32, Colossians 1:18,24, Hebrews 2:12, Hebrews 12:23, “ekklesia” refers to local churches. Of these few exceptions, one of them refers specifically to Israel in the Old Testament (Acts 7:37), and another is a quote of an Old Testament prophecy about the Church (Hebrews 2:12).

Acts 7:37-38
37 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.
38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sinai, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:
(KJV)

Dispensationalists typically define the “Church” as a unique body which began on the day of Pentecost, completely separate from the nation of Israel. Yet, in Stephen’s defense before the Sanhedrin, he referred to Israel after the exodus as “the Church in the wilderness.” Why would Stephen violate the supposed dispensational divide by referring to Israel as “the Church?”

Most of the early Christians could not read Hebrew. They used a Greek translation of the Old Testament made by 70 Jewish scribes about 200 years before Christ. The early Christians and Jews called it “The Version of the Seventy.” Today it is referred to as the “Septuagint” (meaning 70) or simply by the Roman numerals “LXX.” In the first century, the Greek LXX was the common Bible of the Jewish synagogues and the early churches, although the Jews of Judea primarily used the Hebrew Scriptures. The Apostles frequently referred to the LXX and quoted it extensively in the New Testament. In fact, the New Testament writers quoted the LXX more frequently than the Hebrew Old Testament. This is because it was written in the common Greek and could be read by the average believer of that time. Copies were plentiful and relatively cheap, while copies of the Hebrew Scriptures were usually only found at the synagogues within Israel itself and were moreover very expensive.

In Acts 7:37, the reason Stephen referred to Israel as “the Church” was because of his familiarity with the LXX. He was referring to passages like the following.

Deuteronomy 9:10 (LXX)
10 The Lord gave me two stone tablets inscribed by the finger of God. On them were all the commandments the Lord proclaimed to you on the mountain out of the fire, on the day of the Church. (“ekklesia”)

Deuteronomy 18:16 (LXX)
16 For this is what you asked of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the Church (“ekklesia”) when you said, “Let us not hear the voice of the Lord our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die.”

There are many more cases in the LXX where the whole assembly of Israel, when they were gathered to worship, is called “the Church” or the “ekklesia” in the LXX. In fact, the Greek word “ekklesia” (Church) is found 73 times in the LXX Old Testament, almost as many times as in the Greek New Testament. So, the early Christians who spoke Greek had this background as their understanding of the word. They saw the “ekklesia” of the Old Testament as being the same organism as the “ekklesia” of the New Testament of which they were a part and had been “grafted in”. And we are the continuation of that even today at this moment! It is all one assembly of the remnant of those being called out to salvation by faith in God’s sacrifice on our behalf. Those of us today are fortunate enough to know that this sacrifice’s name is Jesus Christ.

So we Gentiles who are being grafted in are not a separate group in God’s program of redemption, but are one with the others, all under the death of Christ on the cross on our behalf. We will have distinctive national identities during the Millennium, such as Jews occupying the land given to Abraham in the Abrahamic Covenant, and everybody else, the redeemed Gentiles, having the rest of the world, but we will all be citizens of the same Kingdom of God under Christ’s rule from His throne in Jerusalem and Ezekiel’s Temple.

I should clarify that this is certainly NOT Replacement Theology. True Replacement Theology says Israel has been cast aside and has no place in God’s plans. Quite the opposite is true. Were it not for Israel, we Gentiles would have no place in God’s plans. Without Israel, we are nothing. “You do not support the root, but the root supports you.” – Romans 11:18

Mark F
Jun 11th 2008, 01:02 AM
Old covenant: (pre-cross) Given to show man's sin and his need for mercy and grace, and by faith trust and believe that God will provide for those who trust in Him alone.


New covenant: (post-cross) Given to those who believe God, (that man is a sinner and needs perfect righteousness to stand before a holy God) and that God has been merciful and has provided that perfect righteousness by faith in Christ Jesus.

Buck shot
Jun 11th 2008, 04:46 PM
It’s like adding layers on a cake. Each layer makes the cake better, because it adds more flavor, but the lower layers are still kept. The key is that we are all responsible for the level of revelation that we have been given.




Good job laying out what you believe Luke!

I really like this quoted part! :thumbsup:

Literalist-Luke
Jun 11th 2008, 05:51 PM
Good job laying out what you believe Luke!

I really like this quoted part! :thumbsup:Thanks. I appreciate it.

Naphal
Jun 13th 2008, 07:21 PM
By far the most accurate and documented post on the subject thus far, well done.

The covenants are definitely not two parts of one cake with layers. They are at best two different cakes and the first has gone stale and old and a newer better cake made and baked according to a new and better recipe.




I have to disagree. Passages like the following indicate that the old covenant was taken away and replaced by a better covenant.

13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. - Heb 8:13

This verse doesn't say the new covenant fulfilled the old. It says it made the first covenant old (obsolete). Any traces of it were about to vanish away for good.

9Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. - Hebrews 10:9-10

Again, the new (second) covenant did not fulfill the old (first) covenant. Christ TOOK AWAY the first, old covenant so that He could establish the second, new covenant.

The old covenant "of ordinances that was against us" was nailed to the cross (Colossians 2:14). We are no longer under the law but under grace.

That the old covenant was replaced by the new covenant is also illustrated in the following passage:

22For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
27For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.
28Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
29But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
30Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
31So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. - Galatians 4:22-31

In this passage, the bondwoman represents the old covenant and the freewoman represents the new covenant. The bondwoman is cast out. We are not children of the bondwoman (old covenant) but of the free (new covenant).

jewel4Christ
Jun 13th 2008, 09:41 PM
Hi,

Old covenant is a covenant unto condemnation. It was put into effect until the time the seed would come that would bring a better covenant, based on promise..so, while God made promises to Abraham and his seed, that seed only consisted of those whom walked by faith, and looked forward to our day, by faith, knowing that it was coming.

Within the old covenant we have many "shadows".

1.The law/written in stone

2.Circumcision in the flesh

3. A fleshly nation/israel

4. A earthly sanctuary/tabernacle

5. A earthly priesthood

6. Physical promises/land, etc

..just to mention a few.


..and, all of these have a true, or what the bible calls a REALITY fulfillment in Christ...that is based in the "spirit" and, it is this reality that christians serve within the new covenant that is based on better promises than these...which are as follows:

1. The law written in our hearts, with the true spiritual intent..and, does not include the law written in stone, but, the true intent does away with the shadow of stone type.

2. The true circumcision, that is in the heart, whereby we are called into one hope, and worship thereby in the spirit of love.

3. A spiritual nation/Israel, for we are all heirs along with Abraham, according to the promise.

4. A heavenly sanctuary/tabernacle, made without hands, built upon Jesus Christ the chief cornerstone, and, we are all spiritual stones, that make up that heavenly house.

5. A heavenly priesthood, with a NEW HIGH PRIEST, Jesus Christ, who speaks of better things than that of earthly kings.

6. Spiritual promises/ eternal life, and salvation, and a place in His heavenly kingdom...

These are just a few of the differences.

The old brought forth wrath, for it brought forth condemnation, whereas the new brings forth life and peace, and it is everlasting.

Those whom oppose the new covenant, have a veil over their eyes:

2 cr 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which [vail] is done away in Christ.

Those whom embrace the new, have overcome the condemnation that held them through the law, by the blood of Christ...and, all things have become new.



2 cr 5:17 Therefore if any man in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Heb 8:4

For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:

[B]Hbr 8:5 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=8&verse=5&version=kjv#5)
Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, [that] thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

Hbr 8:6 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=8&verse=6&version=kjv#6)
But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

Hbr 8:7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=8&verse=7&version=kjv#7)¶For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.


As christians, we must come out of the shadows and allow the glorious covenant in His blood to shine in our hearts.

peaceandlove,

janet

wpm
Jun 13th 2008, 10:10 PM
Good job laying out what you believe Luke!

I really like this quoted part! :thumbsup:

I would kinda see it like the change from a caterpillar into a butterfly. The plan of God has developed to take on a different and fuller form. As Matt94 said, the shadow has been replaced by the substance.

Paul

brakelite
Jun 14th 2008, 10:30 AM
From another thread:

His death signaled the end of the old covenant;
his resurrection signaled the beginning of the new.


Many say this...so :hmm:

What is the old covenant?

What is the new covenant?
Hi Buckshot
I have taken the liberty of pasting this post of mine from another thread.

Covenants and/or testaments are based on promises and agreements between two or more parties.
Our Creator and God is a God of infinite,unfailing,unwavering,uncompromising love.It always has been,and always will be that He would have His erring,sinful,proud,and unbeleiving creatures to know this love, and therefore to know Him.It has always been in His heart of hearts that He and mankind should be on the most intimate of terms, and that both parties know the joy and peace that comes from a loving relationship with each other. The entire government of God, the kingdom of heaven, and the laws by which it is governed, is based on this love.

Deut. 7:7 The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people:
8 But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

Isa 63:7 ¶ I will mention the lovingkindnesses of the LORD, and the praises of the LORD, according to all that the LORD hath bestowed on us, and the great goodness toward the house of Israel, which he hath bestowed on them according to his mercies, and according to the multitude of his lovingkindnesses.
8 For he said, Surely they are my people, children that will not lie: so he was their Saviour.
9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.

See also 1John 4:7-21; 5:1-4.

That is why, when Adam sinned, God still sought him out. (Gen3:9) And love was the motivating factor behind God's promise that the damage to the relationship caused by sin would ultimately be undone that the power of Satan and sin over our lives would be undone:and the power of death would be overcome. How was God to accomplish all this while at the same time honouring justice, love, and mercy? Through Jesus Christ. The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated afetr the fall of Adam. It was a 'revelation of the mystery kept secret through times eternal' (Rom16:25 RV )Forseeing the apostacy of Satan and his deception of Adam and Eve causing their downfall, God had already prepared to meet the crisis. So great was His love for the world that He covenanted to 'give His only begotten Son that whosoever should beleiveth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."(Jn 3:16)
This covenant was to be shown in types and symbols.They were a 'lesson book'for the people of Israel. (Gal.3:24,25), and from them the people would learn (or should have learnt), three vital lessons.

1. Sin results in death,for remission is only possible through the shedding of blood.
Heb 10:[1 ¶ For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

2. The constant shedding of innocent blood was to teach an abhorrence and hatred for sin, and thus encourage the people to turn away from it.
Isa 1:[11 To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.
12 When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts?
13 Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.
14 Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them.
15 And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.
16 ¶ Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil;
17 Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.
18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
19 If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:
20 But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.


3. The symbols and prophecies pointed to a coming Saviour.
Gen 22:8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.

Re 5:6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.

And so how were these promises, this covenant, to be appropriated personally? By faith.(Heb 11). Was Israel at any time justified or saved by works of the law? No. A big error they made however was to trust in the works of the law rather than in the grace and mercy of God.
Rom 10:1 ¶ Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.
2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.
3 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
Habb 2:4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.

What then, does all this mean for us? God's love has not changed, nor His purpose in undoing the works of Satan.(1 Jn 3:8). Therefore it is the method by whichj He is to fulfil His purpose that has changed. Why? Because the old covenant was based on faulty promises. God's promises? Surely not, no., but rather the peoples promises.
Heb 8:6 ¶ But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

They had misjudged the part they were to play in the covenant. In Ex. 19:5,6 God promised (again) to make of Israel a mighty nation and a holy people, an d they answered 'all that the Lord hath spoken we will do.'(vs 8). Unfortunately, they had little idea of what they promised. God said He
would perform and establish His covenant: they people promised they would perform His covenant. Thus God made a new covenant based on better promises.
Heb 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
See also Rom 10: 1-10

therefore today, as always, the just shall live by faith.(Rom 1:117 Heb 10:38)

The old covenant, the old method by which God was to save His people and establish righteousness and obedience to His commandments was theough the Mosaic law. Circumcision, sacrifices and burnt offerings, the annual sabbaths and services of the tabernacle etc. (Heb 9:1-7). The new covenant is still by faith not in a coming Savviour which the services and annual sabbaths pointed to, but in a risen Saviour, who writes His holy moral law in our hearts and minds.(2 Cor 3:3)
Thus through Jesus, Satan is conqured and his power over us broken. Jesus gives us the new birth experience and the power to overcome sin.( 1Jn 3:9 2 Peter 1:3,4). He dies in our place, and we, by faith, die in Him. (Rom 6:1-7). And the result is what Adam and Eve had in Eden before the fall: a loving relationship with God.

Note carefully that the(Ten Commandment) law did not change. Only it's address. The law was the substance of the old covenant, and it remains the substance of the new.
The law was not the old covenant. The law was not faulty.
It is not the law that needed to be changed. It is us. It is us, who are at first rebellious and sinful and disobedient to the law, who need to be changed to loyal, sinless and obedient doers of the law.

OBEDIENCE IS NOT LEGALISM. OBEDIENCE IS A LOVING RESPONSE TO HIM WHO SAID "IF YOU LOVE ME, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS"
__________________

jewel4Christ
Jun 14th 2008, 01:29 PM
Note carefully that the(Ten Commandment) law did not change. Only it's address. The law was the substance of the old covenant, and it remains the substance of the new.
The law was not the old covenant. The law was not faulty.
It is not the law that needed to be changed. It is us. It is us, who are at first rebellious and sinful and disobedient to the law, who need to be changed to loyal, sinless and obedient doers of the law.

OBEDIENCE IS NOT LEGALISM. OBEDIENCE IS A LOVING RESPONSE TO HIM WHO SAID "IF YOU LOVE ME, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS"
__________________


The stone law was superceded to INCLUDE the spiritual intent. That was how it changed.

For, the priesthood being changed, there also is a necessary change in the law. (that is what is written about it).

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

The stone law worketh wrath, because it condemns every man/woman as a sinner.

The changed law has no condemnation within it...for love fulfills it..

love covers a multitude of sin, as we see written.

Today, too many are striving to keep that which can only condemn them, just as Israel after the flesh, did..Same mistake.

peaceandlove,

janet

brakelite
Jun 14th 2008, 11:22 PM
The stone law was superceded to INCLUDE the spiritual intent. That was how it changed.

For, the priesthood being changed, there also is a necessary change in the law. (that is what is written about it).

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

The stone law worketh wrath, because it condemns every man/woman as a sinner.

The changed law has no condemnation within it...for love fulfills it..

love covers a multitude of sin, as we see written.

Today, too many are striving to keep that which can only condemn them, just as Israel after the flesh, did..Same mistake.

peaceandlove,

janet


Sorry, but you misunderstand. The law of Ten Commandments has not changed, but the means by which obedience is made effective, has changed.
As I explained in my post, the old covenant was defective because it was built on faulty promises. Now of course it could not have been God's promises that were faulty, so it must have been Israels. Look back at what the words of Israel reflected.

Exodus 19:8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.

Israel sought to obey God, but were seeking to do so in their own strength.
This does not make the Ten Commandments faulty. Nowhere does the scripture suggest that they were, nor that they needed to be changed. Only the manner in which obedience is to be made effective, as I said before. The change in the covenant involved two things. A change in the priesthood to accomodate the priesthood and mediatorial aspect of the ministry of Messiah, (nothing to do with the Ten Commandments), and a change in how God and His people would relate to one another.
I agree with you that obedience in our own strength is impossible, but that does not make obedience any less necessary. The right way, the Christian way, the only way to obey God's commandments is in God's
strength. So He places the law in our hearts,He fills us with His Holy Spirit (how can we be filled with God's Holy Spirit and not become holy?), He not only justifies us by imputing His righteousness to us, but He also imparts His righteousness to us that we may have the power to obey all God's commandments and live our lives in full compliance to His will.
How does God do this? Through love. God is love. His Holy Spirit is love. If we are filled with His Holy Spirit we are filled with His love. When that love is expressed to God, we find obedience to the first 4 commandments quite natural. When we express that love to others, we find obedience to the last 6 commandments quite natural.
This is the means by which Jesus Himself fulfilled all the commandments. By love. That is why He said that the 2 commandments, loving God and loving your neighbour , fulfills the law. It does not do away with the law, it enables the law to be obeyed.

Naphal
Jun 15th 2008, 04:14 AM
Sorry, but you misunderstand. The law of Ten Commandments has not changed, but the means by which obedience is made effective, has changed.

Actually it has changed but I know you don't agree...I just wanted to voice my agreement with the poster you are addressing. She was fully correct.



As I explained in my post, the old covenant was defective because it was built on faulty promises. Now of course it could not have been God's promises that were faulty, so it must have been Israels.

They broke their promises but that's not what the other verse is speaking about:


Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

Israel isn't the subject here because Israel did not establish the covenant. God established it. God also established the new covenant upon better promises than he made in the first one.


Hebrews 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.


Hebrews 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.


The first covenant was faulty. That is the reason why the second covenant was sought by God.


Gill:


Moses, was a type of Christ, the Mediator of the new covenant; and it was confirmed by the blood of beasts, which was typical of the blood of Christ: this covenant was not "faultless", but was faulty or blameworthy; not that there was anything sinful and criminal in it, but it was deficient; there was a weakness in it; its sacrifices could not make men perfect, nor take away sin; there wanted a larger supply of the grace of the Spirit to write the law of God upon the heart, and to enable men to keep it; there was not in it so full a revelation of the mind and will of God, and of his love and grace, as has since been made; nor did it exhibit a free and full pardon for all sins, unclogged of every condition; the persons that were under it were faulty; hence it follows, that God found fault with them, they could not answer the requirements and end of it: had it been faultless,





This does not make the Ten Commandments faulty. Nowhere does the scripture suggest that they were, nor that they needed to be changed. Only the manner in which obedience is to be made effective, as I said before. The change in the covenant involved two things. A change in the priesthood to accomodate the priesthood and mediatorial aspect of the ministry of Messiah, (nothing to do with the Ten Commandments), and a change in how God and His people would relate to one another.

You are suggesting the first covenant was not replaced but only mildly changed which is so far incorrect I barely know where to begin.


Hebrews 10:9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.


Suffice it to say that the old covenant was replaced fully by the new covenant and that resulted in a very different type of law and how it dealt with us. We are to be dead to the Sinai law rather than be obedient to it.

wpm
Jun 15th 2008, 04:20 AM
You are suggesting the first covenant was not replaced but only mildly changed which is so far incorrect I barely know where to begin.


Exactly! Is not the NT the fuller revelation? Is it not Judaizing to want to take us back to this old abolished impotent system? Premillennialism flabbergasts me on this. Is Christ not enough? Is He not a perfect covering for all eternity for anyone that desires sanctified. Is His blood not effectual enough? Was His sacrifice not the last sacrifice for sin? This is elementary Christianity in my opinion.

Paul

Naphal
Jun 15th 2008, 04:37 AM
Exactly! Is not the NT the fuller revelation? Is it not Judaizing to want to take us back to this old abolished impotent system? Premillennialism flabbergasts me on this. Is Christ not enough? Is He not a perfect covering for all eternity for anyone that desires sanctified. Is His blood not effectual enough? Was His sacrifice not the last sacrifice for sin? This is elementary Christianity in my opinion.

Paul

I'm not sure how closely tied this is to Premillennialism but it is very common in various Messianic groups. I wouldn't quite label it "Judaizing" but I agree it can lead to steps that take us backward from the direction the NT properly takes the Church.

ShirleyFord
Jun 15th 2008, 04:56 AM
I'm not sure how closely tied this is to Premillennialism but it is very common in various Messianic groups. I wouldn't quite label it "Judaizing" but I agree it can lead to steps that take us backward from the direction the NT properly takes the Church.

Naphal,

The many years that I was Premil, I was taught that during the thousand years that Christ would set up a restored Jewish kingdom. And that He would build them a temple so they could once again fully keep the Old Covenant by having a Levitical priesthood to daily offer the blood of animal sacrifices up to God and keep the 7 Old Covenant yearly feasts so that He would physically protect them from their surrounding natural enemy nations as in the days of King David and King Solomon.

This is exactly what Judaism teaches that will happen during the messianic era. From the little I know about Messianic Judaism, it teaches the same Judaism about the thosand years. The only difference seems to be that it recognizes Jesus to be the Messiah of Israel now and teaches further that He is Coming again to be the Messiah of Israel.


Shirley

Naphal
Jun 15th 2008, 05:00 AM
Naphal,

The many years that I was Premil, I was taught that during the thousand years that Christ would set up a restored Jewish kingdom. And that He would build them a temple say they could once again fully keep the Old Covenant by having a Levitical priesthood to daily offer the blood of animal sacrifices up to God and keep the 7 Old Covenant yearly feasts so that He would physically protect them from their surrounding natural enemy nations as in the days of King David and King Solomon.



Yeah I have heard about the future changes where things will revert back to OT customs and practices (which I disagree with) but I believe these same people do not generally keep the Sabbath, or believe we are to not-be-dead to the law et al.

ShirleyFord
Jun 15th 2008, 05:30 AM
Yeah I have heard about the future changes where things will revert back to OT customs and practices (which I disagree with) but I believe these same people do not generally keep the Sabbath, or believe we are to not-be-dead to the law et al.

When I began hearing the claims in the early 1970 (never heard anything about such until then and I had been in Church all of my over 30 years of life back then), none of the endtime prophecy scholars nor any of my pastors believed that that the Church was to keep the Old Covenat Sabbath or any part of Moses Old Covenant law. In fact they strongly advised their followers to stay out of the Old Testament since it was strickly for the Jews and not for the Church. But I thought it strange to teach that since all of them taught and preached fmore from the Old Testament than the New Testament.

But when I first read through the entire Bible twice during 1977, I began to see Jesus from Genesis to Malachi prophecied to come. And then reading through the New Testament, I could see where Jesus fulfilled multiple Old Testament prophecies from especially the Gospels, Paul's epistles and Peter and John's letters.

Then when I got to Hebrews and studied the two different covenants, I really began to question, How could the Old Covenant be restablished since Scriptures there declared it gone and replaced with the New Covenant? Would the New Covenant then be replaced with the Old Covenant? I studied on this during the next 22 years trying to find answers to my questions.

Finally, God clearly showed me the correct answers from His word were "It couldn't and wouldn't" and "No".

Shirley

brakelite
Jun 15th 2008, 06:31 AM
You quoted:
Moses, was a type of Christ, the Mediator of the new covenant; and it was confirmed by the blood of beasts, which was typical of the blood of Christ: this covenant was not "faultless", but was faulty or blameworthy; not that there was anything sinful and criminal in it, but it was deficient; there was a weakness in it; its sacrifices could not make men perfect, nor take away sin; there wanted a larger supply of the grace of the Spirit to write the law of God upon the heart, and to enable men to keep it; there was not in it so full a revelation of the mind and will of God, and of his love and grace, as has since been made; nor did it exhibit a free and full pardon for all sins, unclogged of every condition; the persons that were under it were faulty; hence it follows, that God found fault with them, they could not answer the requirements and end of it: had it been faultless,

This passage is saying precisely what I said. I couldn't agree more.

Naphal
Jun 15th 2008, 06:36 AM
You quoted:
Moses, was a type of Christ, the Mediator of the new covenant; and it was confirmed by the blood of beasts, which was typical of the blood of Christ: this covenant was not "faultless", but was faulty or blameworthy; not that there was anything sinful and criminal in it, but it was deficient; there was a weakness in it; its sacrifices could not make men perfect, nor take away sin; there wanted a larger supply of the grace of the Spirit to write the law of God upon the heart, and to enable men to keep it; there was not in it so full a revelation of the mind and will of God, and of his love and grace, as has since been made; nor did it exhibit a free and full pardon for all sins, unclogged of every condition; the persons that were under it were faulty; hence it follows, that God found fault with them, they could not answer the requirements and end of it: had it been faultless,

This passage is saying precisely what I said. I couldn't agree more.

I am glad you agree with this but you originally made an argument that it was Israel's faulty promises to God that were the subject of the verse but that is not the case even though they did default on some promises. It was the promises to them in the first covenant that were faulty and for that reason was a better covenant created.

brakelite
Jun 15th 2008, 07:02 AM
I am glad you agree with this but you originally made an argument that it was Israel's faulty promises to God that were the subject of the verse but that is not the case even though they did default on some promises. It was the promises to them in the first covenant that were faulty and for that reason was a better covenant created.

It was not God's promises that were faulty; the reason His promises did not have the effect they should have was Israels faulty response. They believed that by keeping the law, they could be made perfect. They were relying on their works, and not living by faith. They were trusting in themselves as opposed to trusting in God. Israel was expecting that the sacrifices of the beasts was all that there was to it. They forgot He to whom the sacrifices pointed.
Those few individuals within Israel (even those forefathers like Abraham) who recognised the truth behind each sacrifice were sanctified, because their faith was pointed in the right direction. Simeon was a good example of such a one.
Lu 2:25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.


God's promises are never faulty. It is our response to them; it is a matter of whether we are willing to meet the conditions, that dictates whether those promises will see fruition.
God has promised to write His law on our heart and in our mind. Whether that promise bears fruit depends upon our faith. Whether our response is one of obedience to His law, or rebellion against it, depends on whether we are willing or not to take God at His word. The just are still required to live by faith.

Naphal
Jun 15th 2008, 07:53 AM
It was not God's promises that were faulty;


The promises made by the first covenant were faulty. That's the subject of the verses:



Hebrews 8:1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
Hebrews 8:2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
Hebrews 8:3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
Hebrews 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
Hebrews 8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.
Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.


The new cov. is a better covenant! God established the first one but established a second, better one! Israel's failed promises to God is not the subject.


Hebrews 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

The first covenant had faults. It was imperfect because God did not make it perfect.

Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

And yes, God also found fault with Israel but this does not negate the fact that the first covenant had faults.





the reason His promises did not have the effect they should have was Israels faulty response. They believed that by keeping the law, they could be made perfect.

The law was not perfect enough to make any sinner perfect or righteous. That was a flaw of the first covenant.


Galatians 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.




They were relying on their works, and not living by faith. They were trusting in themselves as opposed to trusting in God. Israel was expecting that the sacrifices of the beasts was all that there was to it. They forgot He to whom the sacrifices pointed.

Israel did a great many things wrong but this does not negate the first cov.'s flaws.

manichunter
Jun 15th 2008, 08:57 AM
The flawed part of the first marriage covenant was mankind. Mankind could not keep the covenant. His made a second marriage covenant with Himself and Son that He grafted mankind into as a bride of the Son. It is a new covenant in the definition of what it does, not because of age or it being improved. It the same type of covenant, but the covenant partners in this marriage are different. The first one was direct, but man was an adulterer everytime. The second is indirect and the Son is forever faithful and friend of groom will keep us..............

Naphal
Jun 15th 2008, 09:06 AM
It is a new covenant in the definition of what it does, not because of age or it being improved.

Can you document that the new covenant is NOT an improved covenant?


It the same type of covenant, but the covenant partners in this marriage are different.

Can you prove the new cov. is the same type of covenant? Can you even prove it has different partners?

fewarechosen
Jun 15th 2008, 12:56 PM
Hi,

Old covenant is a covenant unto condemnation. It was put into effect until the time the seed would come that would bring a better covenant, based on promise..so, while God made promises to Abraham and his seed, that seed only consisted of those whom walked by faith, and looked forward to our day, by faith, knowing that it was coming.

Within the old covenant we have many "shadows".

1.The law/written in stone

2.Circumcision in the flesh

3. A fleshly nation/israel

4. A earthly sanctuary/tabernacle

5. A earthly priesthood

6. Physical promises/land, etc

..just to mention a few.


..and, all of these have a true, or what the bible calls a REALITY fulfillment in Christ...that is based in the "spirit" and, it is this reality that christians serve within the new covenant that is based on better promises than these...which are as follows:

1. The law written in our hearts, with the true spiritual intent..and, does not include the law written in stone, but, the true intent does away with the shadow of stone type.

2. The true circumcision, that is in the heart, whereby we are called into one hope, and worship thereby in the spirit of love.

3. A spiritual nation/Israel, for we are all heirs along with Abraham, according to the promise.

4. A heavenly sanctuary/tabernacle, made without hands, built upon Jesus Christ the chief cornerstone, and, we are all spiritual stones, that make up that heavenly house.

5. A heavenly priesthood, with a NEW HIGH PRIEST, Jesus Christ, who speaks of better things than that of earthly kings.

6. Spiritual promises/ eternal life, and salvation, and a place in His heavenly kingdom...

These are just a few of the differences.

The old brought forth wrath, for it brought forth condemnation, whereas the new brings forth life and peace, and it is everlasting.

Those whom oppose the new covenant, have a veil over their eyes:

2 cr 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which [vail] is done away in Christ.

Those whom embrace the new, have overcome the condemnation that held them through the law, by the blood of Christ...and, all things have become new.



2 cr 5:17 Therefore if any man in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Heb 8:4

For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:

[B]Hbr 8:5 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=8&verse=5&version=kjv#5)
Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, [that] thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

Hbr 8:6 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=8&verse=6&version=kjv#6)
But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

Hbr 8:7 (http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/popup.pl?book=Hbr&chapter=8&verse=7&version=kjv#7)¶For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.


As christians, we must come out of the shadows and allow the glorious covenant in His blood to shine in our hearts.

peaceandlove,

janet

i totally agree

god writes the law in the hearts and minds of his chosen. the kingdom is within

not everyone is christs - not all receive the law written in their hearts and minds --FEW there be who find it.


now i hear people saying the flaw was with the jews in the first covenent --i agree

but look at it this way if a man and woman is married , and either one cheats and ruins the marriage and causes divorce --- the whole marriage itself is ruined , doesnt matter whos fault --- the marriage itself is corrupt

losthorizon
Jun 15th 2008, 01:08 PM
It is a new covenant in the definition of what it does, not because of age or it being improved.


Do you really think the New Covenant is not superior to the Old Covenant - you need to understand the superior sacrifice of the blood of Christ found under the New Covenant and compare it with the “blood of goats and calves” found under the Old Covenant…
Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. (Heb 9)

jewel4Christ
Jun 15th 2008, 04:18 PM
i totally agree

god writes the law in the hearts and minds of his chosen. the kingdom is within

not everyone is christs - not all receive the law written in their hearts and minds --FEW there be who find it.


now i hear people saying the flaw was with the jews in the first covenent --i agree

but look at it this way if a man and woman is married , and either one cheats and ruins the marriage and causes divorce --- the whole marriage itself is ruined , doesnt matter whos fault --- the marriage itself is corrupt

Yes, that is why the need of a new covenant. I don't understand the concept that is portrayed in this thread that one was not needed???

To put it bluntly, without the new covenant, we would all still be dead in our sins.


peaceandlove,

janet

jewel4Christ
Jun 15th 2008, 04:31 PM
When I began hearing the claims in the early 1970 (never heard anything about such until then and I had been in Church all of my over 30 years of life back then), none of the endtime prophecy scholars nor any of my pastors believed that that the Church was to keep the Old Covenat Sabbath or any part of Moses Old Covenant law. In fact they strongly advised their followers to stay out of the Old Testament since it was strickly for the Jews and not for the Church. But I thought it strange to teach that since all of them taught and preached fmore from the Old Testament than the New Testament.

But when I first read through the entire Bible twice during 1977, I began to see Jesus from Genesis to Malachi prophecied to come. And then reading through the New Testament, I could see where Jesus fulfilled multiple Old Testament prophecies from especially the Gospels, Paul's epistles and Peter and John's letters.

Then when I got to Hebrews and studied the two different covenants, I really began to question, How could the Old Covenant be restablished since Scriptures there declared it gone and replaced with the New Covenant? Would the New Covenant then be replaced with the Old Covenant? I studied on this during the next 22 years trying to find answers to my questions.

Finally, God clearly showed me the correct answers from His word were "It couldn't and wouldn't" and "No".

Shirley

Amen, Shirley!

peaceandlove,

janet

Brother Mark
Jun 15th 2008, 04:42 PM
The promises made by the first covenant were faulty. That's the subject of the verses:

Greetings Naphal. I don't think the promises were faulty. However, I do think the promises of the new covenant are better promises.


Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. Amen! The new covenant is far better than the old. Why?


Hebrews 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

The first covenant had faults. It was imperfect because God did not make it perfect.Correct. But in what way was it faulty?


Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

And yes, God also found fault with Israel but this does not negate the fact that the first covenant had faults.The fault was in the people! Notice in the new covenant he changed the people. He dealt with the people themselves and wrote his covenant on our heart. The old covenant was a good covenant as Paul mentioned many times. But it did not change man's heart. It was a limited covenant. The new covenant does change man's heart and is therefor, a better covenant with a better ministry. The old covenant was not faulty in the way we find fault. It was however, limited.


The law was not perfect enough to make any sinner perfect or righteous. That was a flaw of the first covenant.Not flaw but limitation. Paul wrote that the old covenant was righteous and good in many scriptures. Of course, that is the "flaw" being referred to in scriptures. The problem was not with the covenant but the people. And the covenant did nothing to change the people.

brakelite
Jun 15th 2008, 10:43 PM
The promises made by the first covenant were faulty. That's the subject of the verses:



Hebrews 8:1 Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
Hebrews 8:2 A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
Hebrews 8:3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
Hebrews 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
Hebrews 8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.
Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
I repeat, It was not God's promises that were faulty. How can you think otherwise?



The new cov. is a better covenant! God established the first one but established a second, better one! Israel's failed promises to God is not the subject.


Hebrews 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

The first covenant had faults. It was imperfect because God did not make it perfect.
Come on Naphal, is there anything that God makes that is not perfect? Even we were made perfect, but it was us who stuffed up. Is that God's faul for not making us perfect? Really!


Hebrews 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

And yes, God also found fault with Israel but this does not negate the fact that the first covenant had faults.






The law was not perfect enough to make any sinner perfect or righteous. That was a flaw of the first covenant.


Galatians 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

Your claim that the law is not perfect is totally astray. Paul says the commandments were holy, just and good. Something that is holy is not imperfect. That it doesn't give life doesn't make it imperfect, it simply isn't doing something that it wasn't designed to do in the first place. For what it was designed to do however, that is point out sin, it does a perfect job. Once again however, we stuff things up by changing the law, muddying the waters (or mirror) so to speak, and the law is no longer able to do the job for which it was intended. That is our fault, not the law's or God's .

jewel4Christ
Jun 15th 2008, 11:00 PM
Your claim that the law is not perfect is totally astray. Paul says the commandments were holy, just and good. Something that is holy is not imperfect. That it doesn't give life doesn't make it imperfect, it simply isn't doing something that it wasn't designed to do in the first place. For what it was designed to do however, that is point out sin, it does a perfect job. Once again however, we stuff things up by changing the law, muddying the waters (or mirror) so to speak, and the law is no longer able to do the job for which it was intended. That is our fault, not the law's or God's .



Jesus Like Melchizedek

Heb 7: 11If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? 12For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law. 13He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17For it is declared:
"You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=65&chapter=7&version=31#fen-NIV-30066a)] 18The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19(for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.


The law was weak, because men could not keep it. It ONLY works wrath in us...the bringing in of that better hope undoes that wrath.


That is why the law was changed....love and mercy were added, and in so doing, we are then not condemned by that which can only work wrath.


Romans 4:14-16 (New International Version)



14For if those who live by law are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless, 15because law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.
16Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham's offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.



The only way that the law does not work wrath is that it is kept perfectly, and NO HUMAN, besides Jesus has ever done so.


Thanks be to God, that He has come and shed His blood to rescue us from the bondage of that which was impossible.


Christians live by the law of FAITH, not the stone law.





peaceandlove,


janet

Brother Mark
Jun 15th 2008, 11:51 PM
Come on Naphal, is there anything that God makes that is not perfect? Even we were made perfect, but it was us who stuffed up. Is that God's faul for not making us perfect? Really!

Scripture said the first covenant fell short Brakelite. I don't think we can really argue against that. It didn't measure up. Doesn't mean it wasn't good. But it wasn't what was needed.

jewel4Christ
Jun 16th 2008, 01:29 AM
Scripture said the first covenant fell short Brakelite. I don't think we can really argue against that. It didn't measure up. Doesn't mean it wasn't good. But it wasn't what was needed.

Yes, amen.

The bible makes it clear that the law is good IF one use it lawfully.

What was it's purpose?

To condemn.

How did Israel misuse it?

By making it a measuring stick to righteousness.

What did God then do?

Cut them off, due to unbeleif, because this is what undoes the gospel...which is based on grace, through faith, and that NOT of yourself...it is the gift of God.

One must rest in Jesus finished work, or one is not in the gospel.

That is why the old covenant shadow concerning the sabbath pointed to the REALITY that is in Christ.

We are warned about replacing the REALITY with a shadow.


peaceandlove,


janet

Naphal
Jun 16th 2008, 01:32 AM
A few things that scripture says about the old law:

the law entangles with the yoke of bondage- Galatians 5:1

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law- Galatians 3:13

the strength of sin is the law- 1 Corinthians 15:56

the law worketh wrath- Romans 4:15

we are delivered from the law- Romans 7:6

we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter- Romans 7:6

brakelite
Jun 16th 2008, 06:57 AM
Jesus Like Melchizedek

Heb 7: 11If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? 12For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law. 13He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17For it is declared:
"You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek."[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=65&chapter=7&version=31#fen-NIV-30066a)] 18The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19(for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.
You are making the same mistake as so many others; muddying the waters by confusing the issues. You rightly quote Hebrews as the basis for what we see as evidence for change in the law. But what law? The law that pertains to the priesthood. Right? It was that law that was changed to accomodate the priesthood of Christ, because Jesus was of the tribe of Judah, and not Levi. Jesus' priesthood was after another order, the order of Melchizadek. Now, you are about to talk about the Ten Commandment law, which although is the basis of the ceremonial law, it is a separate entity.




The law was weak, because men could not keep it. It ONLY works wrath in us...the bringing in of that better hope undoes that wrath.
That is nonsense. Because men have not been able to keep the 6th commandment and they get angry and kill one another, does that really mean that the commandment not to kill is weak? Or is it that men are weak? Think about it.






That is why the law was changed....love and mercy were added, and in so doing, we are then not condemned by that which can only work wrath.

Now you are mixing the 2 laws up in one sentence. The ceremionial law was changed, the Ten Commandments were not.
Ps 111:7 The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure.
8 They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.

Ps 119:172 My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness.

Note from the above that God's commandments are righteousness. Now read carefully the following...

Isa 51:6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.
7 Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law; fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye afraid of their revilings.
8 For the moth shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool: but my righteousness shall be for ever, and my salvation from generation to generation.

Simple maths. If a==b, and b=c, then c must = a. Right? So if God's commandments are righteousness, and His righteousness shall never be abolished, then simple logic (and David, and Jesus ) must mean that God's commandments shall never be abolished either.


Romans 4:14-16 (New International Version)



14For if those who live by law are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless, 15because law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.
16Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham's offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.



The only way that the law does not work wrath is that it is kept perfectly, and NO HUMAN, besides Jesus has ever done so.


Thanks be to God, that He has come and shed His blood to rescue us from the bondage of that which was impossible.


Christians live by the law of FAITH, not the stone law.


This part I agree with. We must live by faith. How much faith do you have? Do you have the faith to believe that God has the power and the willingness to keep you from sinning? Are you willing to avail yourself of that power? Do you desire to cease from sin?
The bondage was attempting to do the impossible, yes. But it is impossible only because we so often attempt to do this (obey) in our own strength. However, with God, all things are possible. We can do all things through Christ who strengthens us. That includes keeping the law.

2Witnesses
Jun 16th 2008, 07:09 AM
Greetings from Israel,

It was the 'covenant' of the law for righteousness which was fulfilled and removed in Christ. And now we can stand before God by the covenant of grace, which is of faith.

But in removing the covenant of works, the 613 of Moses, does not mean the righteousness of God was removed. It is still sin to murder. This is an offense against God and man. But it is not sin to eat pork.

The Covenant of the Law was a whole; to offend in one point was to offend in all. And for this reason Paul calls the Law the ministry of condemnation, 2 Cor 3. The Law could never produce life, though there was a righteousness according to the Law. But it was not a righteousness which could give life, otherwise Christ died for nothing.

God made a NEW covenant with Israel and Judah. And Gentiles were brought into this covenant. And this is not a 're-newed' Old Covenant. It is new.

2Witnesses

jewel4Christ
Jun 16th 2008, 03:57 PM
This part I agree with. We must live by faith. How much faith do you have? Do you have the faith to believe that God has the power and the willingness to keep you from sinning? Are you willing to avail yourself of that power? Do you desire to cease from sin?
The bondage was attempting to do the impossible, yes. But it is impossible only because we so often attempt to do this (obey) in our own strength. However, with God, all things are possible. We can do all things through Christ who strengthens us. That includes keeping the law.

My faith is not in me, it is in HIM, and HIS finished work. My works cannot add to His one degree.

When you rest in HIM, you no longer are looking at how well you can perform the law....that is what it means to die to the law.

I have died to the law.

I cannot have it resurected in my life, because IF I did, it would mean I would have to RECRUCIFY my Savior.

Those of you whom think you can keep the law perfectly and, that you don't sin, is about as far from the truth as one can go.


He whom says he has no sin is a liar, according to the word of God.

When you break one, you are just as guilty as if you broke every one.


I don't want to argue with you on this. I have already given my conscience on the matter.

Let everyone whom reads these threads make up their own mind.


peaceandlove,

janet

jewel4Christ
Jun 16th 2008, 04:00 PM
A few things that scripture says about the old law:

the law entangles with the yoke of bondage- Galatians 5:1

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law- Galatians 3:13

the strength of sin is the law- 1 Corinthians 15:56

the law worketh wrath- Romans 4:15

we are delivered from the law- Romans 7:6

we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter- Romans 7:6
http://bibleforums.org/images/buttons/quote.gif (http://bibleforums.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1673679)


Amen.


Never again, will I turn again to that which held me in bondage.


The law was not made for those in Christ, it was made for sinners, to condemn them, so that they could see their need for a Savior. Once you have arrived in Him, you are no longer under the schoolmaster.....Praise God, for the deliverance.



peaceandlove,

janet

Buck shot
Jun 16th 2008, 08:16 PM
The law was not the old covenant. The law was not faulty.
It is not the law that needed to be changed. It is us. It is us, who are at first rebellious and sinful and disobedient to the law, who need to be changed to loyal, sinless and obedient doers of the law.

OBEDIENCE IS NOT LEGALISM. OBEDIENCE IS A LOVING RESPONSE TO HIM WHO SAID "IF YOU LOVE ME, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS"
__________________
Thanks to all who are bringing what they believe the covenants are to the table! ;)

I really liked this blue part!

Buck shot
Jun 16th 2008, 08:18 PM
I would kinda see it like the change from a caterpillar into a butterfly. The plan of God has developed to take on a different and fuller form. As Matt94 said, the shadow has been replaced by the substance.

Paul

Exactly, but what about those that chose not to turn into a butterfly? Do they get the new covenant?

Buck shot
Jun 16th 2008, 08:37 PM
Greetings from Israel,

It was the 'covenant' of the law for righteousness which was fulfilled and removed in Christ. And now we can stand before God by the covenant of grace, which is of faith.

But in removing the covenant of works, the 613 of Moses, does not mean the righteousness of God was removed. It is still sin to murder. This is an offense against God and man. But it is not sin to eat pork.

The Covenant of the Law was a whole; to offend in one point was to offend in all. And for this reason Paul calls the Law the ministry of condemnation, 2 Cor 3. The Law could never produce life, though there was a righteousness according to the Law. But it was not a righteousness which could give life, otherwise Christ died for nothing.

God made a NEW covenant with Israel and Judah. And Gentiles were brought into this covenant. And this is not a 're-newed' Old Covenant. It is new.

2Witnesses

Good post!

We must remember that even though the new covenant is new, it was the old covenant that points us to the new. Without understanding we sin against God, we would have no need to seek His mercy.

Thanks, Myrton

wpm
Jun 17th 2008, 09:26 PM
Exactly, but what about those that chose not to turn into a butterfly? Do they get the new covenant?

There is no one that was saved by the old covenant - only the new. But the OT saint placed his trust in the temporary covering of the OT sacrifice until the reality had come and done away with the former unsatisfactory.

Paul

wpm
Jun 18th 2008, 04:41 AM
Greetings Naphal. I don't think the promises were faulty. However, I do think the promises of the new covenant are better promises.

Amen! The new covenant is far better than the old. Why?

Correct. But in what way was it faulty?

The fault was in the people! Notice in the new covenant he changed the people. He dealt with the people themselves and wrote his covenant on our heart. The old covenant was a good covenant as Paul mentioned many times. But it did not change man's heart. It was a limited covenant. The new covenant does change man's heart and is therefor, a better covenant with a better ministry. The old covenant was not faulty in the way we find fault. It was however, limited.

Not flaw but limitation. Paul wrote that the old covenant was righteous and good in many scriptures. Of course, that is the "flaw" being referred to in scriptures. The problem was not with the covenant but the people. And the covenant did nothing to change the people.

This sounds like election language. Faulty is faulty. Scriptural language must be preferred to man's words. Scripture doesn't need reinterpreted. ;)

You are mixing the law with the old covenant, that is what is causing your problem. The law is the written moral law.

Paul

Paul

Naphal
Jun 18th 2008, 04:51 AM
You are mixing the law with the old covenant, that is what is causing your problem.


No...the law and the covenant are one in the same. There is no difference .

Galatians 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Here something called the covenant is also called the law and we know this is the Sinai covenant and the law of Moses because of the dating of it coming 430 years after the promise to Abraham.

Then we only have to prove that the Sinai covenant is the one referred to as the old covenant (the NT uses the term old testament but is the same exact thing)

Galatians 4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
Galatians 4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
Galatians 4:23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
Galatians 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

This also draws attention between the two covenants, one is the Sinai and one is the new covenant.


2 Corinthians 3:13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:
2 Corinthians 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
2 Corinthians 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
2 Corinthians 3:16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.

And here we see the old testament, the one abolished, is the one related to Moses which is the Sinai covenant/testament.

jewel4Christ
Jun 18th 2008, 05:04 AM
No...the law and the covenant are one in the same. There is no difference .

Galatians 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Here something called the covenant is also called the law and we know this is the Sinai covenant and the law of Moses because of the dating of it coming 430 years after the promise to Abraham.

Then we only have to prove that the Sinai covenant is the one referred to as the old covenant (the NT uses the term old testament but is the same exact thing)

Galatians 4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
Galatians 4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
Galatians 4:23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
Galatians 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

This also draws attention between the two covenants, one is the Sinai and one is the new covenant.


2 Corinthians 3:13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:
2 Corinthians 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
2 Corinthians 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
2 Corinthians 3:16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.

And here we see the old testament, the one abolished, is the one related to Moses which is the Sinai covenant/testament.

Amen, to that!


peaceandlove,

janet

manichunter
Jun 18th 2008, 06:00 AM
If I was the devil, how would I play this to the detriment of both parties.

I would make one ultra conservative, extremist in interpretation, legalistic, and self-righteous about their works and knowledge. They would hate the license of their fellow brother. They consider the rules of faith as non-abritrary and binding.

I would make the other ultra liberal, progressive in interpretation, free of constraints, and self-righteous about their knowledge and intentions. They hate the bondage of their brother. They consider the rules of the faith as abritrary and non-binding.

Now, I got them fighting each other over nothing that add to the salvation of either. They defeat themselves while I steal their inheritance and next generation.

Extremes are usually always a lie. The truth is usually some where in the middle. The devil keeps making us pick a side against one another brother.

The truth of the matter is that those who not respect the spiritual torah or sabbath are still a brother in the Lord. Those that do respect spiritual torah and sabbaths are still a brother in the Lord. Most will only know what was what when we all stand in line.........

My concern is not to fix someone else's place in line. I have to strive for my own mark of the high calling. I share the revelations God gave me as a seed and walk away. It is God's concern to deal with the condition of the person's soul and soil.

To conclude, it is divisive and of the devil to condemn and persecute one another over personal interpretations that add nothing to the work of salvation. I have not seen that on this thread, so do not think I am pointing anyone out. I have seen nothing but maturity from most posters. I am talking about life in general. It just upsets me to see the devil win or steal anything...........

Naphal
Jun 18th 2008, 06:08 AM
Extremes are usually always a lie. The truth is usually some where in the middle.

Maybe, but sometimes being in the middle is known in the scriptures as being "lukewarm" and that's what the Lord dislikes :)



Revelation 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
Revelation 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.


I believe the devil simply works to confuse and deceive and cause people to go contrary to what is written in the scriptures.

manichunter
Jun 18th 2008, 06:43 AM
N-man I did not mean it like that. Are just aguementative as a character trait. LOL

I was not refering to Scripture, but how we treat one another.

The bottom line
1.Some say that we have defined written rules to live by, and they desire defined rules.

2.Some say that we do not have any defined written rules to live by, and they do want any defined rules

I am of the first crowd. praise God. To others this needless bondage, but it is my bondage. Others are of the second crowd. praise God. To me they live as unto themselves and Lord and not I.

This issue of debate will always be around until the end. This happenning of events is also nothing new.

Salvation was original of the Jews. Then gentiles starting getting saved and became the next challenge to seat of authority for the Jews. The old Jewish Guard resisted but to no avail. Well the early believers were uprooted by the Catholics that took the seat. The early gentile guard resisted to no avail. Next the protestants asked for a share of the seat. The Catholics resisted but to no avail. Next came the Pentecostal who asked for a share of the seat. The protestant old guard resisted but to no avail. Then came the Charismatic movement of believers asking for their share of the seat. The old guards again resisted but to no avail. Now we have the people claiming something new again and the old guard are once again stood up to resist. I think the wisdom of Gamaliel is in order- Acts 5
34 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:34&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space; 35 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:35&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men. 36 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:36&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed F10 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5&t=kjv&st=1&new=1&l=en#F10) him, were scattered, and brought to nought. 37 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:37&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed F11 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5&t=kjv&st=1&new=1&l=en#F11) him, were dispersed. 38 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:38&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: 39 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:39&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

Let us both see where this goes, because I am curious as well.........

jewel4Christ
Jun 18th 2008, 02:16 PM
N-man I did not mean it like that. Are just aguementative as a character trait. LOL

I was not refering to Scripture, but how we treat one another.

The bottom line
1.Some say that we have defined written rules to live by, and they desire defined rules.

2.Some say that we do not have any defined written rules to live by, and they do want any defined rules

I am of the first crowd. praise God. To others this needless bondage, but it is my bondage. Others are of the second crowd. praise God. To me they live as unto themselves and Lord and not I.

This issue of debate will always be around until the end. This happenning of events is also nothing new.

Salvation was original of the Jews. Then gentiles starting getting saved and became the next challenge to seat of authority for the Jews. The old Jewish Guard resisted but to no avail. Well the early believers were uprooted by the Catholics that took the seat. The early gentile guard resisted to no avail. Next the protestants asked for a share of the seat. The Catholics resisted but to no avail. Next came the Pentecostal who asked for a share of the seat. The protestant old guard resisted but to no avail. Then came the Charismatic movement of believers asking for their share of the seat. The old guards again resisted but to no avail. Now we have the people claiming something new again and the old guard are once again stood up to resist. I think the wisdom of Gamaliel is in order- Acts 5
34 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:34&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space; 35 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:35&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) And said unto them, Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what ye intend to do as touching these men. 36 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:36&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed F10 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5&t=kjv&st=1&new=1&l=en#F10) him, were scattered, and brought to nought. 37 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:37&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed F11 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5&t=kjv&st=1&new=1&l=en#F11) him, were dispersed. 38 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:38&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought: 39 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=ac+5:39&t=kjv&sr=1&l=en) But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

Let us both see where this goes, because I am curious as well.........

I would have to say your assessment is not correct. I don't know any christians that believe in no rules to live by.

The rules we live by, are basic.

They are two.

Love God with your whole heart, and your neighbor as yourself. They are the same rules from the beginning, because God did not give His people a new commandment.

It is when we misuse what the letter of the law was made for that confusion comes into play.

That is the mistake that Israel made.

God made the letter, or stone law to condemn.

It was not made for those whom are in Christ, but for a purpose to lead those whom are not TO HIM.

When you live by the two, you live by love, and love fulfills the intents of the heart.

Love never did anyone any harm.

Not when it is the agape love of Christ.

Days, and etc, were all a part of the ceremonial..and, we are not under it.

I do agree with you that you are free to place one day above another, because Paul said that very plainly, but it is not allowed for you to place your own conscience on this, on others, as a rule.

It is not a rule...but, a conscience thing.

When we make it a rule, we have failed to understand.

peaceandlove,


janet

davidandme
Jun 18th 2008, 10:43 PM
The diference between the old and the new covenant is not really that much. The main difference between the two, is where is going to be alocated. First lets see what the Bible has to say about it. Let look at Jeremiah 31-33
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

Jer 31:33 But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Notice why the Lord is making a new covenant. The reason for this is that first the people of Israel said that they were going to keep it. But they did not. God always wanted the law of their hearts and minds but it was never there completly. So God wrote them on stones so the people of Israel would not forget them.

Now lets look at Heb 8:8-10

Heb 8:7-10
For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

Hbr 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hbr 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

Hbr 8:10 For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people

Notice the reason for the change of covenant. The change of covenant was not done because Jesus came to this earth. God never changes. The covenant was change, because the people regarded them not. They did not do what the Law written on stone told them to do. So the only way that the people will genuianly obey the Law is, if God will write them in their hearts. Of course, God respects your free will. He will not write anything on people's hearts if they don't want to. God said that He will never chage or alter His covenant. The only thing that will change, as mention before, is the location. Please read Psalms 89:34
Psalms 89:34
My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.

It is my hope and prayer that we understand better the topic of the two covenants.
God bless.

Naphal
Jun 18th 2008, 10:47 PM
The diference between the old and the new covenant is not really that much.

You disprove this statement within this very post and there are more scriptures that attest to the great and many differences.

davidandme
Jun 18th 2008, 10:50 PM
I respecfully dissagree. Don't worry, will agree on something some day. :)

Naphal
Jun 18th 2008, 10:55 PM
I respecfully dissagree. Don't worry, will agree on something some day. :)

I'm sure we agree on many things but probably not much regarding the Sabbath and the Law and Covenants.

manichunter
Jun 18th 2008, 11:42 PM
The only real difference between the marriage covenants are who are the marriage partners. First Covenant, Jesus directly married mankind in a covenant. Mankind could not fulfill his commitment to the covenant. Second Covenant, God (Father) made a covenant with with Himself (Son), who fulfilled the requirements of the covenant and married mankind as his wife. Hence mankind is brought into the covenant in directly as spouse. As spouse we stilll have requirements until during our bethroval until the bridegroom comes back to get us..........

davidandme
Jun 19th 2008, 02:35 AM
I agree with that. Hopefuly our difference will be resolved soon. I am not here to argue. My purpose here is to share the word of God, learn from others and hopely others will learn from me. God bless you alsways.

jewel4Christ
Jun 19th 2008, 05:37 AM
Actually, the difference between the old and new covenants are as different as death, and LIFE.

2 Corinthians 3:6-11 [ Read Chapter (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=2co+3&t=asv&st=1&new=1&l=en) | Discuss these Verses (http://www.studylight.org/forums/posting.php?mode=newtopic&f=12&subject=2%C2%A0Corinthians+3:6-11) ] 6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 7 But if the ministration of death, written, [and] engraven on stones, came with glory, so that the children of Israel could not look stedfastly upon the face of Moses for the glory of his face; which [glory] was passing away: 8 how shall not rather the ministration of the spirit be with glory? 9 For if the ministration of condemnation hath glory, much rather doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. 10 For verily that which hath been made glorious hath not been made glorious in this respect, by reason of the glory that surpasseth. 11 For if that which passeth away [was] with glory, much more that which remaineth [is] in glory.



The stone law was a law unto condemnation and death..praise be to God that He has rescued us from the curse of the law, so that we can now stand in the ministration of righteousness, through the spirit.


peaceandlove,

janet

manichunter
Jun 19th 2008, 06:33 AM
If the first was the shadow of things to come, then what are the things that showed up on the second covenant. What is your shadow? What is the difference between you and your shadow........

Col 2:17 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=col+2:17&translation=nas&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) -things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ

Heb 10:1 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=heb+10:1&translation=nas&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) -For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near.

They are made in the image and likeness of heavenly things. They are the model and reflection of things of Jesus. Hence they are the same...... Only thing changed is the revelation and vantage point.......... Example- There is an actual and literal temple in heaven, but God still gave us the replica that symbolized aspects of His Son.

Naphal
Jun 19th 2008, 06:35 AM
What is your shadow of yourself. What is the difference between you and your shadow

What???????????????????

manichunter
Jun 19th 2008, 06:42 AM
Okay I think is clearer.

jewel4Christ
Jun 19th 2008, 01:36 PM
If the first was the shadow of things to come, then what are the things that showed up on the second covenant. What is your shadow? What is the difference between you and your shadow........

Col 2:17 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=col+2:17&translation=nas&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) -things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ

Heb 10:1 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=heb+10:1&translation=nas&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) -For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near.

They are made in the image and likeness of heavenly things. They are the model and reflection of things of Jesus. Hence they are the same...... Only thing changed is the revelation and vantage point.......... Example- There is an actual and literal temple in heaven, but God still gave us the replica that symbolized aspects of His Son.

How can you say they are the same? One is only a earthly picture of what really exists. If you draw a picture of a flower, is it the same as the REAL flower?

Would you be able to for example, SMELL it on paper, would you be able to enjoy the true brilliance, of it?

In the same way, Jesus is the REALITY, and His kingdom is a HEAVENLY kingdom, that cannot be touched by human hands, so, He sent a shadow as a picture, but the shadow in no way will ever replace or be the same as the reality. In fact, to think it is, or could be is idolatry.


peaceandlove,

janet

Buck shot
Jun 19th 2008, 03:13 PM
The stone law was a law unto condemnation and death..praise be to God that He has rescued us from the curse of the law, so that we can now stand in the ministration of righteousness, through the spirit.


peaceandlove,

janet

This prayer was prayed under the old covenant by Solomon when they had just finished the temple...


1 Kings 8:23 And he said, LORD God of Israel, there is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servants that walk before thee with all their heart:
24 Who hast kept with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him: thou spakest also with thy mouth, and hast fulfilled it with thine hand, as it is this day.
25 Therefore now, LORD God of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him, saying, There shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel; so that thy children take heed to their way, that they walk before me as thou hast walked before me.
26 And now, O God of Israel, let thy word, I pray thee, be verified, which thou spakest unto thy servant David my father.
27 But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?
28 Yet have thou respect unto the prayer of thy servant, and to his supplication, O LORD my God, to hearken unto the cry and to the prayer, which thy servant prayeth before thee to day:
29 That thine eyes may be open toward this house night and day, even toward the place of which thou hast said, My name shall be there: that thou mayest hearken unto the prayer which thy servant shall make toward this place.
30 And hearken thou to the supplication of thy servant, and of thy people Israel, when they shall pray toward this place: and hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place: and when thou hearest, forgive.
31If any man trespass against his neighbour, and an oath be laid upon him to cause him to swear, and the oath come before thine altar in this house:
32Then hear thou in heaven, and do, and judge thy servants, condemning the wicked, to bring his way upon his head; and justifying the righteous, to give him according to his righteousness.
33When thy people Israel be smitten down before the enemy, because they have sinned against thee, and shall turn again to thee, and confess thy name, and pray, and make supplication unto thee in this house:
34Then hear thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of thy people Israel, and bring them again unto the land which thou gavest unto their fathers.
35When heaven is shut up, and there is no rain, because they have sinned against thee; if they pray toward this place, and confess thy name, and turn from their sin, when thou afflictest them:
36Then hear thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of thy servants, and of thy people Israel, that thou teach them the good way wherein they should walk, and give rain upon thy land, which thou hast given to thy people for an inheritance.
37If there be in the land famine, if there be pestilence, blasting, mildew, locust, or if there be caterpiller; if their enemy besiege them in the land of their cities; whatsoever plague, whatsoever sickness there be;
38What prayer and supplication soever be made by any man, or by all thy people Israel, which shall know every man the plague of his own heart, and spread forth his hands toward this house:
39Then hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and forgive, and do, and give to every man according to his ways, whose heart thou knowest; (for thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men;)
40That they may fear thee all the days that they live in the land which thou gavest unto our fathers.
41Moreover concerning a stranger, that is not of thy people Israel, but cometh out of a far country for thy name's sake;
42(For they shall hear of thy great name, and of thy strong hand, and of thy stretched out arm;) when he shall come and pray toward this house;
43Hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and do according to all that the stranger calleth to thee for: that all people of the earth may know thy name, to fear thee, as do thy people Israel; and that they may know that this house, which I have builded, is called by thy name.
44If thy people go out to battle against their enemy, whithersoever thou shalt send them, and shall pray unto the LORD toward the city which thou hast chosen, and toward the house that I have built for thy name:
45Then hear thou in heaven their prayer and their supplication, and maintain their cause.
46If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy, so that they carry them away captives unto the land of the enemy, far or near;
47Yet if they shall bethink themselves in the land whither they were carried captives, and repent, and make supplication unto thee in the land of them that carried them captives, saying, We have sinned, and have done perversely, we have committed wickedness;
48And so return unto thee with all their heart, and with all their soul, in the land of their enemies, which led them away captive, and pray unto thee toward their land, which thou gavest unto their fathers, the city which thou hast chosen, and the house which I have built for thy name:
49Then hear thou their prayer and their supplication in heaven thy dwelling place, and maintain their cause,
50And forgive thy people that have sinned against thee, and all their transgressions wherein they have transgressed against thee, and give them compassion before them who carried them captive, that they may have compassion on them:
51For they be thy people, and thine inheritance, which thou broughtest forth out of Egypt, from the midst of the furnace of iron:
52That thine eyes may be open unto the supplication of thy servant, and unto the supplication of thy people Israel, to hearken unto them in all that they call for unto thee. 53For thou didst separate them from among all the people of the earth, to be thine inheritance, as thou spakest by the hand of Moses thy servant, when thou broughtest our fathers out of Egypt, O LORD God.


Our Father has never changed. He shows mercy with both covenants :kiss:

manichunter
Jun 19th 2008, 03:27 PM
How can you say they are the same? One is only a earthly picture of what really exists. If you draw a picture of a flower, is it the same as the REAL flower?

Would you be able to for example, SMELL it on paper, would you be able to enjoy the true brilliance, of it?

In the same way, Jesus is the REALITY, and His kingdom is a HEAVENLY kingdom, that cannot be touched by human hands, so, He sent a shadow as a picture, but the shadow in no way will ever replace or be the same as the reality. In fact, to think it is, or could be is idolatry.


peaceandlove,

janet


What??????????
You are saying the same thing in agreement except one thing.

Can I produce the same shadow as you or can you produce my shadow. They might look alike, but they are still unique because of their source.

jewel4Christ
Jun 19th 2008, 03:39 PM
This prayer was prayed under the old covenant by Solomon when they had just finished the temple...


1 Kings 8:23 And he said, LORD God of Israel, there is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath, who keepest covenant and mercy with thy servants that walk before thee with all their heart:
24 Who hast kept with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him: thou spakest also with thy mouth, and hast fulfilled it with thine hand, as it is this day.
25 Therefore now, LORD God of Israel, keep with thy servant David my father that thou promisedst him, saying, There shall not fail thee a man in my sight to sit on the throne of Israel; so that thy children take heed to their way, that they walk before me as thou hast walked before me.
26 And now, O God of Israel, let thy word, I pray thee, be verified, which thou spakest unto thy servant David my father.
27 But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?
28 Yet have thou respect unto the prayer of thy servant, and to his supplication, O LORD my God, to hearken unto the cry and to the prayer, which thy servant prayeth before thee to day:
29 That thine eyes may be open toward this house night and day, even toward the place of which thou hast said, My name shall be there: that thou mayest hearken unto the prayer which thy servant shall make toward this place.
30 And hearken thou to the supplication of thy servant, and of thy people Israel, when they shall pray toward this place: and hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place: and when thou hearest, forgive.
31If any man trespass against his neighbour, and an oath be laid upon him to cause him to swear, and the oath come before thine altar in this house:
32Then hear thou in heaven, and do, and judge thy servants, condemning the wicked, to bring his way upon his head; and justifying the righteous, to give him according to his righteousness.
33When thy people Israel be smitten down before the enemy, because they have sinned against thee, and shall turn again to thee, and confess thy name, and pray, and make supplication unto thee in this house:
34Then hear thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of thy people Israel, and bring them again unto the land which thou gavest unto their fathers.
35When heaven is shut up, and there is no rain, because they have sinned against thee; if they pray toward this place, and confess thy name, and turn from their sin, when thou afflictest them:
36Then hear thou in heaven, and forgive the sin of thy servants, and of thy people Israel, that thou teach them the good way wherein they should walk, and give rain upon thy land, which thou hast given to thy people for an inheritance.
37If there be in the land famine, if there be pestilence, blasting, mildew, locust, or if there be caterpiller; if their enemy besiege them in the land of their cities; whatsoever plague, whatsoever sickness there be;
38What prayer and supplication soever be made by any man, or by all thy people Israel, which shall know every man the plague of his own heart, and spread forth his hands toward this house:
39Then hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and forgive, and do, and give to every man according to his ways, whose heart thou knowest; (for thou, even thou only, knowest the hearts of all the children of men;)
40That they may fear thee all the days that they live in the land which thou gavest unto our fathers.
41Moreover concerning a stranger, that is not of thy people Israel, but cometh out of a far country for thy name's sake;
42(For they shall hear of thy great name, and of thy strong hand, and of thy stretched out arm;) when he shall come and pray toward this house;
43Hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and do according to all that the stranger calleth to thee for: that all people of the earth may know thy name, to fear thee, as do thy people Israel; and that they may know that this house, which I have builded, is called by thy name.
44If thy people go out to battle against their enemy, whithersoever thou shalt send them, and shall pray unto the LORD toward the city which thou hast chosen, and toward the house that I have built for thy name:
45Then hear thou in heaven their prayer and their supplication, and maintain their cause.
46If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy, so that they carry them away captives unto the land of the enemy, far or near;
47Yet if they shall bethink themselves in the land whither they were carried captives, and repent, and make supplication unto thee in the land of them that carried them captives, saying, We have sinned, and have done perversely, we have committed wickedness;
48And so return unto thee with all their heart, and with all their soul, in the land of their enemies, which led them away captive, and pray unto thee toward their land, which thou gavest unto their fathers, the city which thou hast chosen, and the house which I have built for thy name:
49Then hear thou their prayer and their supplication in heaven thy dwelling place, and maintain their cause,
50And forgive thy people that have sinned against thee, and all their transgressions wherein they have transgressed against thee, and give them compassion before them who carried them captive, that they may have compassion on them:
51For they be thy people, and thine inheritance, which thou broughtest forth out of Egypt, from the midst of the furnace of iron:
52That thine eyes may be open unto the supplication of thy servant, and unto the supplication of thy people Israel, to hearken unto them in all that they call for unto thee. 53For thou didst separate them from among all the people of the earth, to be thine inheritance, as thou spakest by the hand of Moses thy servant, when thou broughtest our fathers out of Egypt, O LORD God.


Our Father has never changed. He shows mercy with both covenants :kiss:

I agree there was mercy for those whom looked FORWARD, by PROMISE to the new covenant. They are of those to whom WE are added.

They were not saved by the old covenant, they were saved by mercy, through looking forward to our day...(the new covenant)


I agree God does not change.


peaceandlove,

janet

jewel4Christ
Jun 19th 2008, 03:41 PM
What??????????
You are saying the same thing in agreement except one thing.

Can I produce the same shadow as you or can you produce my shadow. They might look alike, but they are still unique because us their source.


Perhaps I am misunderstanding you.

I apologise, if that is the case.


Even our shadows, though hold no substance....they only reflect something else, agree?

peaceandlove,

janet

John146
Jun 20th 2008, 03:12 PM
If the first was the shadow of things to come, then what are the things that showed up on the second covenant. What is your shadow? What is the difference between you and your shadow........

Col 2:17 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=col+2:17&translation=nas&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) -things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ

Heb 10:1 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=heb+10:1&translation=nas&st=1&new=1&sr=1&l=en) -For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near.

They are made in the image and likeness of heavenly things. They are the model and reflection of things of Jesus. Hence they are the same...... Only thing changed is the revelation and vantage point.......... Example- There is an actual and literal temple in heaven, but God still gave us the replica that symbolized aspects of His Son.

You need to read further in Hebrews 10.

8Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. - Hebrews 10:8-10

How can the old covenant be the same as the new covenant when He took away the old covenant in order to establish the new covenant? Also, the old covenant didn't include "the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all". The old covenant consisted of the animal sacrifices "which can never take away sins" (Heb 10:11). There's a huge difference between the animal sacrifices of the old covenant and the once for all sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ of the new covenant. The covenants are the same? Hardly.

Brother Mark
Jun 20th 2008, 03:51 PM
You need to read further in Hebrews 10.

8Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. - Hebrews 10:8-10

How can the old covenant be the same as the new covenant when He took away the old covenant in order to establish the new covenant? Also, the old covenant didn't include "the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all". The old covenant consisted of the animal sacrifices "which can never take away sins" (Heb 10:11). There's a huge difference between the animal sacrifices of the old covenant and the once for all sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ of the new covenant. The covenants are the same? Hardly.

They aren't the same. But his point is valid. There is a heavenly tabernacle. The OT lays out how we are to worship today, only in the spirit not the letter. As priest, what are our priestly duties to God in the heavenly tabernacle? What kind of sacrifices do we offer today? These answers can be found in the new testament and the old testament.

For instance, Romans 12, tells us we are to offer up our bodies as a living sacrifice. In other scriptures we learn that we can offer up a sacrifice of praise. IOW, we still offer sacrifices in the tabernacle, but now we do so by the spirit of the law instead of the letter.

slightlypuzzled
Jun 20th 2008, 04:10 PM
Hebrews 7 goes a long way towards settling it, for me. The writer makes the point;

12For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also.

He points out that Jesus is priest by an oath; God swore that He would be a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek, and that His priesthood would never pass away. So, if you change the priesthood, you also change the law...this also implies a change of covenant, since the Priesthood has changed hangs. Throught the book, the writer offers several reasons for Christ's superiority of the Old Covenant...

yoyo7th
Jun 20th 2008, 06:06 PM
Every preacher or evangelist has explained the difference between the old and new... to the audience DIFFERENTLY
:rofl:

John146
Jun 20th 2008, 06:22 PM
They aren't the same. But his point is valid.

I thought part of his point was to say they are the same? So, which point of his was valid?



There is a heavenly tabernacle. The OT lays out how we are to worship today, only in the spirit not the letter. As priest, what are our priestly duties to God in the heavenly tabernacle? What kind of sacrifices do we offer today? These answers can be found in the new testament and the old testament.

For instance, Romans 12, tells us we are to offer up our bodies as a living sacrifice. In other scriptures we learn that we can offer up a sacrifice of praise. IOW, we still offer sacrifices in the tabernacle, but now we do so by the spirit of the law instead of the letter.

Yep

Brother Mark
Jun 20th 2008, 06:38 PM
I thought part of his point was to say they are the same? So, which point of his was valid?

That there is a heavenly tabernacle.

DeafPosttrib
Jun 20th 2008, 07:56 PM
Isn't the new covenant now in effect unto us today? Was Christ's blood on the cross failed the new covenant? Is Calvary, a vain gospel?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

keck553
Jun 20th 2008, 10:12 PM
I'm still learning things, but at this time I have arrived at this point....please understand this is what i have come to know and in no way do I think this view should be imposed on anyone. God has a way of growing His children and maturing them for His purposes. I abhor false teachers, yet I am humble enough in the sight of God to change towards His unchanging truth. The unchangable foundation we all become one in is that Jesus is the Rock upon where we hold steadfast. As long as we plant ourselves into that Rock, we have assurance.

I have spent the past few years studying the presence of Messiah in what most of us call the Old Testament.

One thing I try to keep foremost in my heart, strengthened by the Holy Spirit and God's Mercy is to not cast any stumbling blocks in front of believers (Rom. chap 14). Our commission is not to pound our point of view or even our revelations into other believers; it is to sow seed and allow the Holy Spirit in His perfect wisdom to convict or reveal. I think that God reveals things about His character and details of His plan to us in His timing and according to His will. It doesn't mean any of us are more or less favored by God, or any such nonsense. God loves us all - we are His people and He is our God.

And so I was recently studying a biblical feast.....

Every year on Yom Kippur a high Priest stripped off his fancy God-designed garments, made sure of his ritual cleanliness, stipped down to a humble tunic and entered into the Holy of Holies, and sprinkled the blood of a goat on the mercy seat. If accepted by God, the past year's sins of Israel were atoned.

A little rabbit tail here.....

God said the penalty of sin is death. When Adam disobeyed God, when Adam saw, coveted, ate, then hid - God Himself by Grace sacrificed an animal and covered Adam and his wife - a shadow of things to come in the Mosiac covenant. Adam did not deserve this unearned favor from God, but he received it as a gift. God doesn't change.

When God brought the descendants of Abraham out of Egypt, it was by Grace that He saved and freed them. Unearned favor from a promise made to Abraham, who's faith was credited to him as righteousness. The Torah of Moses was never meant to save anyone, as God had already saved them, as the trust, atoning work and blood of Jesus saves and frees us.

Israel was brought into a land surrounded by pagans, and God sanctified them and set them apart for His use. Torah in Hebrew means 'aim straight for the mark' more than it means 'the law'. Humans made 'the law' a yoke. God has always saved by His Grace, or unearned favor to those who trust in Him, otherwise David would have been condemned under the 'law' of Moses for his many transgressions.

And what happens to those who are considered blameless under 'the law'? John the Baptist's parents were credited as blamelss in Torah, yet they certainly were sinners.

Luke 1:5 In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah, and he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron (Levi), and her name was Elizabeth.
Luke 1:6 They were both righteous in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments (Torah) and requirements of the Lord.

I assume they were credited as righteous in the same way Abraham was - by trust, and not for thier blameless Torah walk.

Anyway, back to the Holy of Holies - For the entire year the high priest represented God to the people of Israel and the foreigners grafted in. But that one day, the Day of Atonement, the high priest represents the people before God. He strips down to a humble tunic because he as no authority before God. If God accepts the sacrifice, then he lives, and the past year's sins of Israel are atoned.

Now the commission of Israel was pronounced to Abraham witth this messianic prophecy: Gen 22:18 In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.

Israel's commission was to be a light to the nations, to reveal the Living God to the nations. Israel failed in that mission, as recorded in Isaiah. God Himself completed that mission.

Jesus humbly removed His glory clothes and came to be one of us. He went into the heavenly Holy of Holies Himself and sprinkled His blood on the mercy seat on our behalf. He is the High Priest who once and for all atoned for all our sins-past, present and future. Those who repent theiir sins and have faith in the atoning sacrifice of Messiah have a greater (and the only) representative before the Father.

Jeremiah tells us that God would make our stoney hearts flesh and place His Torah (in the hebrew) on our hearts - and that He did. Christians are the most, the most charitble people on earth. Christians no more give to charity as a vehicle to salvation as someone who follows any of God's instructions. Of course we all engage in works until God reveals to us how insuffecient our sefl effort is. Charity is a huge deal in Torah. The term 'evil eye' comes from the characterization of stingyness.

Embedded in Jews is the culture of God. There are Jews who deny Messiah yet love God with all their hearts, all their souls and all thier strength. Just an observation and this is certainly no excuse but - the Church starting in the 3rd century further complicated matters by changing the Savior's Hebrew given name to Jesus and endowing Him with blue eyes and european features, threw out all God's appointed days, replaced them with pagan holidays, then proceeded to war in the name of God. Did they really expect Jews to worship a Swede? What was that Jesus said about making converts twice as fit for hell?? He was talking to some rude Pharisees, but I can see where He was also giving prophecy. We're all human and we all are tempted and corrupted by the same adversary.

All of us at some point in our lives have to look upon the hands and feet that we scarred.

One of the most amazing events my wife has ever witnessed was to see a Jew who survived the Nazi death camps find her Jewish Messiah. It's difficult to describe the tattoo'ed serial numbers on her arm without actually seeing it. The tremedous cycle of emotional joy of coming to Jesus coupled with the utter shame and repentance of denying Him for so many years was so telling on her face, as she cried and danced at the same time. She truely was an amazing witness to all who were there.

God doesn't change. But thank God in His mercy He can change us!

davidandme
Jun 21st 2008, 12:29 AM
There is really no difference between the old covenant with the new. God wants His covenant to be on our hearts from the very beginning. The Bible tell us what the Covenant between God and man is. What you do with it. Its up to you. Please read Deut 4:12-13 and Ezequiel 36: 26-27 Here is the text. Plese read it before you reply. Is not that long.
Deut 4 12-13
And the LORD spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice.
.13 And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone

Eze 36:26-27
A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

davidandme
Jun 21st 2008, 12:36 AM
You are very knowlegable of the word of God for a new Christian. God bless. :)

losthorizon
Jun 21st 2008, 12:57 AM
There is really no difference between the old covenant with the new.


Do you really know what you are saying? Do you consider the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross (New Covenant) to be a much more superior sacrifice than the blood of goats and calves (Old Covenant)? I would suggest you read the book of Hebrews and pay attention to detail...
Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. Hebrews 9:12

davidandme
Jun 21st 2008, 01:00 AM
Please read my post tittle: 2 diferent laws. Them tell me what you think. God bless.

losthorizon
Jun 21st 2008, 01:49 AM
Please read my post tittle: 2 diferent laws. Them tell me what you think. God bless.
I did tell you what I think of your so-called "2 diferent laws" - they are not two they are one and that law (the Law of Moses) was fulfilled by Christ and nailed to the cross. Please see my post to you on that thread (#6). I will repost it here:


Originally Posted by losthorizon...
The inspired writers of the OT never separate the 10 commandments from the rest of the law of Moses and the Law of Moses as a whole was nailed to the cross. Jesus Christ is the end of the law which he fulfilled perfectly.
"For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.” Rom 10:4
Do you think the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross found under the New Covenant is much more superior to the sacrifice of the blood of goats and calves under the Old Covenant?

davidandme
Jun 21st 2008, 03:17 AM
OK, I have given enough evidence to fill an entire book. That's all I can do. If people don't belive that sin exist, I wonder why they need Jesus? It seems that Jesus died just so people can stop the ceremonial laws and nothing else. If that is what some people want to believe, what can I do? God bless.

losthorizon
Jun 21st 2008, 03:30 AM
OK, I have given enough evidence to fill an entire book. That's all I can do. If people don't belive that sin exist, I wonder why they need Jesus? It seems that Jesus died just so people can stop the ceremonial laws and nothing else. If that is what some people want to believe, what can I do? God bless.
No one is saying sin doesn’t exist (it does) – where do you get such a notion. What is being presented is the truth presented in the New Testament. Christians are not bound by the shadows of Judaism – Christians live under the Law of Christ and that law is not about day-keeping. You didn’t answer my question - do you think the once-for-all-time sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross under the New Covenant is superior to the repeated sacrifices of the blood of goats and calves under the Old Covenant?

manichunter
Jun 21st 2008, 06:04 AM
You need to read further in Hebrews 10.


8Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. - Hebrews 10:8-10

How can the old covenant be the same as the new covenant when He took away the old covenant in order to establish the new covenant? Also, the old covenant didn't include "the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all". The old covenant consisted of the animal sacrifices "which can never take away sins" (Heb 10:11). There's a huge difference between the animal sacrifices of the old covenant and the once for all sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ of the new covenant. The covenants are the same? Hardly.


Easily, because the translation has been taken out of context to fit an established mindset and viewpoint. The spirit and truth is missing. We have failed to understand with our mind what could never be understand by carnality in the first. No amount of study, debating, or research can grasp the truth without the Holy Spirit. To obtain knowledge without the inspiration, guidance, and lordship of the Holy Spirit causes a person to rely on carnality. What is flesh reaps flesh, and what is spirit reaps spirit.
The written torah was a shadow applicable to a physical nations. The spiritual torah is the actual torah applicable to a spiritual kingdom under the guidance and lordship of the Holy Spirit.

Here is how spiritual torah applies in some examples not within the intelligence of most Christians. Most Christians are clueless concerning the whys.

1.Circumcision (Spiritually impregnated and adopted into a new spiritual kingdom by a spiritual covenant)
Physical circumcision is no longer practiced, but a person still has to be circumcised. Now circumcision is no longer physical but spiritual. Hence the shadow has been taken away but replaced by the actual. Why is circumcision still necessary? How is this circumcision done?

Ro 2:29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.

Jer 9:26 Egypt, Judah, Edom, the people of Ammon, Moab, and all who are in the farthest corners, who dwell in the wilderness. For all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in the heart."

2.Sacrificial offering system (Spiritually living and performing the ceremonial requirements of Torah)
The animal and meal offerings are no longer practiced, but a believer still has to offer sacrifices as a royal priest. Now sacrifices are no longer physical but spiritual. Hence the shadow has been taken away but replaced by the actual. How are sacrifices preformed? What did Paul mean by himself being used as a drink offering for others? Is God requiring the same from believers in order for them to be sacrifices?

1Pe 2:5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

Ro 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.

Php 2:17 Yes, and if I am being poured out as a drink offering on the sacrifice and service of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all.

3.Commandments/Instructions for doctrine (Making talmidims of Jesus with the use of His commandments)
The written letter of the torah has been transplanted, but a believer stills needs to be disciplined and taught how to relate to God. Now the physical torah is no longer physical but spiritual. Hence the shadow has been taken away but replaced with the actual. The torah has been transplanted onto the spirit of a believer which made his adoption and citizenship complete in a New KINGOM. Why is the torah written on a believer’s heart? Why does Jesus tell us to keep his torah if we love Him?

Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Ro 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Joh 14:15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments.

2Jo 1:6 This is love, that we walk according to His commandments. This is the commandment, that as you have heard from the beginning, you should walk in it.

Mt 28:19-20 19Go therefore F165 and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen. F166

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

4.We are actually held accountable to higher standard of torah since the revelation of spiritual torah has been manifested. Now we are judged and chastised for more than our actions but our motives and mindset have been added. We preach that the torah is done away with, but God is chastising and judging His saints for deeper things because the standards of the torah have been elevated and permanently engraved on our heart. What we do in flesh is a manifestation of our soul state of obedience to love and holiness in behavior and attitude. Hence the condition of a man’s soul bears fruit in our actions. So sin is to be known in our inward parts now, not just our acts, but now things like our bad attitude, pride, hate, and hypocrisy are included. It is now a sin to entertained adultery where as in the First Covenant just the act of committing adultery was judged as sin.
Jesus gave us the friend of the bridegroom to prepare His bride for the wedding. The Holy Spirit's job is to sanctify Christians post spiritual birth by removing the power of sin over their life. Only He as God knows what it takes to sanctify people who fool themselves (we all are born with a deceitful wicked heart that the Spirit has to expose and sanctify). Torah could never be accomplished in the flesh, but it can be accomplished by the Holy Spirit.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Eze 36:27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.

Ro 8:4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Mt 15:11 Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man."

Mt 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

1Jo 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

Jer 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Jer 17:10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings

There is more…………. But I am sleepy, my flesh is weak and acting up LOL

ravi4u2
Jun 21st 2008, 07:23 AM
When talking about 'old' covenants, many just think about the Mosaic covenant, which was God's covenant with a group of people. But other covenants like edenic covenant, adamic covenant, noahic covenant, abrahamic covenant, etc, pre-date the mosaic covenant. So, in essence these are the 'older' covenants. Did the new covenant 'replace' these older covenants as well or just the mosaic covenant?

manichunter
Jun 21st 2008, 07:29 AM
When talking about 'old' covenants, many just think about the Mosaic covenant, which was God's covenant with a group of people. But other covenants like edenic covenant, adamic covenant, noahic covenant, abrahamic covenant, etc, pre-date the mosaic covenant. So, in essence these are the 'older' covenants. Did the new covenant 'replace' these older covenants as well or just the mosaic covenant?

The Mosiac was covenant was different than the rest. They were personal covenants with God making a sole promise to an individual. The Mosiac covenant was a maritial covenant with a people God sanctified unto Himself. He replaced that maritial covenant with a new maritial covenant. The second maritial covenant is between Father and Son with the Holy Spirit being the friend of the Bridegroom. The believer is brought indirectly as a spouse like Boaz and Ruth.

Naphal
Jun 21st 2008, 08:22 AM
When talking about 'old' covenants, many just think about the Mosaic covenant, which was God's covenant with a group of people. But other covenants like edenic covenant, adamic covenant, noahic covenant, abrahamic covenant, etc, pre-date the mosaic covenant. So, in essence these are the 'older' covenants. Did the new covenant 'replace' these older covenants as well or just the mosaic covenant?


Just the Mosaic covenant. In scripture the "old covenant" is the Mosaic and the "new covenant" is that which replaced it.

Naphal
Jun 21st 2008, 08:24 AM
The believer is brought indirectly as a spouse like Boaz and Ruth.

No, the believer is the direct participant in the covenant. It is between God and believer. In the symbology of marriage the son is used to represent the groom but he symbolizes the entire Godhead in this matter. The covenant is NOT between Father and Son.

davidandme
Jun 21st 2008, 08:49 PM
The ordianances of the law were shadow of things to come. But the moral Law has always been there including the Sabbath. The Sabbath wich are part of the moral Law of God was sanctified before sin enter in to this world. What are the commandments of Jesus? Well let the Bible explains this for us. First lets read John 13:24 This is what Jesus said: A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. This is not really a different commandmant. This is really a summary of the Ten Commandmants. Now lets read 1 John 1 and 2:7 I think these texts are self explainatory.

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;


1Jo 1:2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen [it], and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)


1Jo 1:3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship [is] with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.


1Jo 1:4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.


1Jo 1:5 ¶ This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.


1Jo 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:


1Jo 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.


1Jo 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.


1Jo 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us [our] sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.


1Jo 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us
Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.

Naphal
Jun 21st 2008, 10:00 PM
The ordianances of the law were shadow of things to come. But the moral Law has always been there including the Sabbath.

No, all the law was a shadow of what was to come and the Sabbath has never been part of the moral law.



The Sabbath wich are part of the moral Law of God was sanctified before sin enter in to this world.

That is also a false claim.



What are the commandments of Jesus? Well let the Bible explains this for us. First lets read John 13:24 This is what Jesus said: A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.




This is not really a different commandmant.



How is it that Jesus says it's a new commandment but you disagree? If he says it's a new commandment then it is new.



This is really a summary of the Ten Commandmants.


He does not say it's a summary. He says it's a new commandment.

wpm
Jun 21st 2008, 10:26 PM
The diference between the old and the new covenant is not really that much. The main difference between the two, is where is going to be alocated. First lets see what the Bible has to say about it. Let look at Jeremiah 31-33
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

Jer 31:33 But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Notice why the Lord is making a new covenant. The reason for this is that first the people of Israel said that they were going to keep it. But they did not. God always wanted the law of their hearts and minds but it was never there completly. So God wrote them on stones so the people of Israel would not forget them.

Now lets look at Heb 8:8-10

Heb 8:7-10
For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

Hbr 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

Hbr 8:9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

Hbr 8:10 For this [is] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people

Notice the reason for the change of covenant. The change of covenant was not done because Jesus came to this earth. God never changes. The covenant was change, because the people regarded them not. They did not do what the Law written on stone told them to do. So the only way that the people will genuianly obey the Law is, if God will write them in their hearts. Of course, God respects your free will. He will not write anything on people's hearts if they don't want to. God said that He will never chage or alter His covenant. The only thing that will change, as mention before, is the location. Please read Psalms 89:34
Psalms 89:34
My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.

It is my hope and prayer that we understand better the topic of the two covenants.
God bless.

I don't think you are grasping either the weakness and typology of the old covenant or the substance or superiority of the new. You are overlooking the temporalness of the unsatisfactory abolished system and the eternalness of the new. You are missing the fundamental differences between the 2 covenants. Hebrews 10 is a powerful chapter confirming the inferiority, limitations and imperfection of the old covenant in contrast to the power, superiority and perfection that is found in the new covenant. This can be seen in whatever angle you compare the covenants. Despite what Premillennialism imagines, this chapter also confirms that the Old Covenant is eternally abolished.

It would be helpful for us to let the Holy Spirit compare the two. We will see that one is the antithesis of the other one and it is impossible for the removed sacrifices to be restored, like Premillennialism so zealously desires.

Firstly, the old covenant was merely “a shadow of good things to come” (Hebrews 10:1).

The new covenant is “the very image” (Hebrews 10:1), it is “a better and an enduring substance” (Hebrews 10:34).

The old covenant was faulty. Hebrews 8:7-8 confirms, “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.” Hebrews 8:13 says, “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” Whilst the Cross ushered in the new covenant, and the removal of the old covenant, many of the outward manifestations of the old covenant still remained. God had vowed to remove every last vestige of the old. This He did. He graciously gave them 40 years to repent (AD30-AD70). Not long after this epistle was written, the temple with its now-rejected sacrifices was finally destroyed. With the destruction of the temple, the temple sacrifices vanished away forever.

Secondly, in the old covenant “sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year” (Hebrews 10:3).

In the new covenant God promises, “their sins and iniquities will I remember no more” (Hebrews 8:12, 10:17).

There is remembrance in the old covenant, whereas there is none under the new.

Thirdly, Hebrews 10:4 tells us, "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." Here we see the inferiority of the old covenant described. It couldn’t remove sin. It couldn’t remove guilt. It was imperfect. Under it, “every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God. (Hebrews 10:11-12).

Hebrews 9:26 tells us,“now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.” In doing this, we are “sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Hebrews 10:10).

Fourthly, the old covenant “can never with those sacrifices … make the comers thereunto perfect” (Hebrews 10:1). Hebrews 9:9 tells us, the “gifts and sacrifices” that the priests offered “could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience.” The fact is, “For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did” (Hebrews 7:19). That “better hope” was Christ and the transaction He paid for sin at the cross. It was that final sacrifice for sin that perfects the redeemed. Why? Christ has satisfied every righteous demand of a holy God. He took upon Himself our sin and in turn took the penalty that was due to us. There is therefore no condemnation for them that are in Christ; “For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified” (Hebrews 10:14).

Paul

manichunter
Jun 22nd 2008, 03:26 AM
No, the believer is the direct participant in the covenant. It is between God and believer. In the symbology of marriage the son is used to represent the groom but he symbolizes the entire Godhead in this matter. The covenant is NOT between Father and Son.

Who is the judge of all things and represent the authority?....... Who earned justification of righteousness? Who's blood was shed? Who earned the covenant? Did mankind earn the covenant? Did the Father require righteousness? Who's will was to be done? Man I could not accomplish the requirements of any covenant with holy God. God Himself satisfied His own requirements (Jesus and His deal with the Father). There is so much more to say but it would get thrown away since most people are unaware of Scriptural culture and inheritance laws..........

Naphal
Jun 22nd 2008, 03:34 AM
Hebrews 10 is a powerful chapter confirming the inferiority, limitations and imperfection of the old covenant in contrast to the power, superiority and perfection that is found in the new covenant.


I couldnt say "Amen" enough times or loudly enough to demonstrate proper approval of your statement. How anyone could have a greater reverence for the old than the new (or even the same reverence) is beyond me. The two are very very different and in terms of perfection and completeness, the new wins without challenge.

Naphal
Jun 22nd 2008, 03:38 AM
Who is the judge of all things and represent the authority?....... Who earned justification of righteousness? Who's blood was shed? Who earned the covenant?


Jesus didn't "earn" the covenant! He was the mediator of it! He was not the recipient of it!


Hebrews 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

3316
3316 mesites {mes-ee'-tace}
from 3319; TDNT - 4:598,585; n m
AV - mediator 6; 6
1) one who intervenes between two, either in order to make or
restore peace and friendship, or form a compact, or for
ratifying a covenant
2) a medium of communication, arbitrator


With all due respect, you simply have no comprehension of the new covenant or who it was for and who it came from and who the mediator of it is. You need to toss out all your current understandings of it and go to new covenant 101, a beginners class at a local church and build a true foundation of understanding about what it is. That's the only way to get this correct :)

manichunter
Jun 22nd 2008, 04:35 AM
Jesus didn't "earn" the covenant! He was the mediator of it! He was not the recipient of it!


Hebrews 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

3316
3316 mesites {mes-ee'-tace}
from 3319; TDNT - 4:598,585; n m
AV - mediator 6; 6
1) one who intervenes between two, either in order to make or
restore peace and friendship, or form a compact, or for
ratifying a covenant
2) a medium of communication, arbitrator


With all due respect, you simply have no comprehension of the new covenant or who it was for and who it came from and who the mediator of it is. You need to toss out all your current understandings of it and go to new covenant 101, a beginners class at a local church and build a true foundation of understanding about what it is. That's the only way to get this correct :)

Naphal, has the written torah been translated or reveal to be spiritual.

ShirleyFord
Jun 22nd 2008, 04:36 AM
I couldnt say "Amen" enough times or loudly enough to demonstrate proper approval of your statement. How anyone could have a greater reverence for the old than the new (or even the same reverence) is beyond me. The two are very very different and in terms of perfection and completeness, the new wins without challenge.

I agree Naphal. And the Apostle Paul does likewise:

Galatians 4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the (OC) one by a bondmaid, (NC) the other by a freewoman.

23 But he who was of (OC) the bondwoman was born after the flesh; (NC) but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; (the OC) the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

26 (NC) But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
He is showing two different covenants with 2 different Jerusalems:

The Old Covenant

earthly Jerusalem
in bondage
physical
from below
temporary
types and shadows pointing to the real substance

The New Covenant

heavenly Jerusalem
free
spiritual
from above
eternal
the literal real substance

And what did Paul tell those Christians who still wanted to keep the law of the Old Covenant?


30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

In other words cast out the Old Covenant that it shall not be heir with the New Covenant.


The New Covenant was actually the first covenant and the covenant that God made with Abraham that Jesus confirmed with Israel when He came during His earthly ministry, 430 years before God gave Moses the Old Covenant Law for Israel.

Galatians 3:17-18 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. 18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.


Here we have the NC of promise God made with Abraham for His descendants Israel and the OC of law God gave to Moses and made with Abraham's descendants Israel.


So what was God's purpose for the OC law?

Galatians 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.

Notice the word "till" showinging that that OC law was temporary and would come to an end. It would end when the seed came. Who is the seed?

Galatians 3:16 16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Naphal
Jun 22nd 2008, 04:38 AM
Naphal, has the written torah been translated or reveal to be spiritual.

Pardon?


..................

manichunter
Jun 22nd 2008, 04:57 AM
Pardon?


..................

Has torah completely passed away or is the torah spiritual now. What is your knowledge of it?

Here is how spiritual torah applies in some examples not within the intelligence of most Christians. Most Christians are clueless concerning the whys.

1.Circumcision (Spiritually impregnated and adopted into a new spiritual kingdom by a spiritual covenant)
Physical circumcision is no longer practiced, but a person still has to be circumcised. Now circumcision is no longer physical but spiritual. Hence the shadow has been taken away but replaced by the actual. Why is circumcision still necessary? How is this circumcision done?

Ro 2:29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.

Jer 9:26 Egypt, Judah, Edom, the people of Ammon, Moab, and all who are in the farthest corners, who dwell in the wilderness. For all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in the heart."

2.Sacrificial offering system (Spiritually living and performing the ceremonial requirements of Torah)
The animal and meal offerings are no longer practiced, but a believer still has to offer sacrifices as a royal priest. Now sacrifices are no longer physical but spiritual. Hence the shadow has been taken away but replaced by the actual. How are sacrifices preformed? What did Paul mean by himself being used as a drink offering for others? Is God requiring the same from believers in order for them to be sacrifices?

1Pe 2:5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

Ro 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.

Php 2:17 Yes, and if I am being poured out as a drink offering on the sacrifice and service of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all.

3.Commandments/Instructions for doctrine (Making talmidims of Jesus with the use of His commandments)
The written letter of the torah has been transplanted, but a believer stills needs to be disciplined and taught how to relate to God. Now the physical torah is no longer physical but spiritual. Hence the shadow has been taken away but replaced with the actual. The torah has been transplanted onto the spirit of a believer which made his adoption and citizenship complete in a New KINGOM. Why is the torah written on a believer’s heart? Why does Jesus tell us to keep his torah if we love Him?

Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Ro 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Joh 14:15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments.

2Jo 1:6 This is love, that we walk according to His commandments. This is the commandment, that as you have heard from the beginning, you should walk in it.

Mt 28:19-20 19Go therefore F165 and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen. F166

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

4.We are actually held accountable to higher standard of torah since the revelation of spiritual torah has been manifested. Now we are judged and chastised for more than our actions but our motives and mindset have been added. We preach that the torah is done away with, but God is chastising and judging His saints for deeper things because the standards of the torah have been elevated and permanently engraved on our heart. What we do in flesh is a manifestation of our soul state of obedience to love and holiness in behavior and attitude. Hence the condition of a man’s soul bears fruit in our actions. So sin is to be known in our inward parts now, not just our acts, but now things like our bad attitude, pride, hate, and hypocrisy are included. It is now a sin to entertained adultery where as in the First Covenant just the act of committing adultery was judged as sin.

Jesus gave us the friend of the bridegroom to prepare His bride for the wedding. The Holy Spirit's job is to sanctify Christians post spiritual birth by removing the power of sin over their life. Only He as God knows what it takes to sanctify people who fool themselves (we all are born with a deceitful wicked heart that the Spirit has to expose and sanctify). Torah could never be accomplished in the flesh, but it can be accomplished by the Holy Spirit.

1Co 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Eze 36:27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.

Ro 8:4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Mt 15:11 Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man."

Mt 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

1Jo 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

Jer 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Jer 17:10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings

There is more…………. But I am sleepy, my flesh is weak and acting up LOL

Naphal
Jun 22nd 2008, 05:03 AM
Has torah completely passed away or is the torah spiritual now.

Much of it has been fulfilled or replaced. Much is prophecy and is yet to be fulfilled. The covenant of the torah has been replaced by a newer and better one. I'd say much of the torah is spiritually found in the new but there is too much legalistic, literal applicating of the old on top of the new and that's just incorrect.

manichunter
Jun 22nd 2008, 05:14 AM
Much of it has been fulfilled or replaced. Much is prophecy and is yet to be fulfilled. The covenant of the torah has been replaced by a newer and better one. I'd say much of the torah is spiritually found in the new but there is too much legalistic, literal applicating of the old on top of the new and that's just incorrect.

Earlier you made an attempt to criticize me about my lack of knowledge concerning the truth. I will withhold any comment concerning you, but I know what you are thinking now deep down in your heart. I also know what you are thinking in your mind. My aim is to be your brother, not your competitor. I am sure we can learn from one another if we reframe from being carnal. I try so hard not to be prideful, arrogant, and puffed up in relationships with family. It does not produce the righteousness of God.

Proving others wrong and making myself out to be right adds nothing to me. That is carnal. Sharing knowledge and truth by carnal means is still sin becuase it violates love. I just share revelations of the Spirit that expose lies the enemy has embedded into the Kingdom messages. This is not a work of my mind, because I learned a lot by this study myself as the Spirit taught me.

Have you read the hold post. What is your opinion of it...........?

Naphal
Jun 22nd 2008, 05:18 AM
My aim is to be your brother, not your competitor.

Fair enough :)


I am sure we can learn from one another if we reframe from being carnal. I try so hard not to be prideful, arrogant, and puffed up in relationships with family. It does not produce the righteousness of God.

Agreed.






Have you read the hold post. What is your opinion of it...........?



What post is that?

brakelite
Jun 22nd 2008, 05:27 AM
Certainly, to follow Abraham's example with regards to Hagar, that is to attempt to find fulfillment of God's promises by our own works, will lead us to bondage.
For those who are the true children of Abraham are those who will inherit the promises, and they are those who will follow Abraham's example of faith, trusting in God to fulfill His own promises and not attempting to do things for ourselves.
Those promises are fulfilled in the seed, Jesus Christ. And we are partakers of those promises as we trust in Christ, as did our spiritual father, Abraham.
Many after Abraham did follow his good example as with Sarah, while many followed his bad example as with Hagar.
Those who followed his good example also saw in those types and shadows the gospel. They saw, as did Abraham, that faith in a coming Redeemer was their only hope, and they rejoiced in that hope. They longed for the day that the patriarchs and prophets foretold, the day when God Himself should provide a Lamb for the sacrifice. Though they may not have been fully aware of the circumstances of the coming Saviour, they still had faith because they had the types and symbols shown to them by Moses.
By the time of Jesus, however, Israel as a whole had lost sight of the truth. Apart from a select few such as Anna and Simeon, the truths of the types and symbols had been lost, misunderstood, and Israel as a whole had reverted back to Abraham's bad example of trusting in their works.
Thus Jesus said of them, that while they were children of the flesh, they were not true children of Abraham, lest they would be doing the faith- works of Abraham and would believe in Him.
So, God being God, had a plan B. Righteousness was not being attained by faith as was His original intention with the first covenant, because Israel were attempting to attain to God's righteousness by works, and not by faith.Israel's promises were the fault,; they couldn't keep them.
So God's plan B came into effect. He, instead of having the law on stone and having Israel going through the sacrificial system as defined in the law of Moses, would write the law on the minds and the hearts as they trusted in the very person and fulfillment of the types and symbols, Jesus Himself.

Today, righteousness comes to us by faith. We cannot attain it by works any more successfully than did those before us. Righteousness comes to us as we trust in our Saviour. We are changed day by day, sanctified, and the righteousness of the law that was not met through observing the rites and services of the sanctuary (no matter how rigidly that law was kept) comes to us as we trust in the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives, The righteousness of the of the law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh (as did Abraham with Hagar) but after the Spirit (as did Abraham with Sarah).

Rom 2:25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.
26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Circuncision is still necessary, but of the heart not the flesh. And that circumcision profits us if we keep the law, but if we don't keep the law, the circumcision counts as uncircumcision.

The types and symbols have been replaced by the reality, I agree. But the purpose of all the covenants was to bring us all, from Adam to the last man born on this planet, into line with God's holy law. To free us not from the law, but from the condemnation of the law because of sin. To make us righteous, holy, and obedient, as was the commendation given to Abraham.

Ge 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

ShirleyFord
Jun 22nd 2008, 05:51 AM
Circuncision is still necessary, but of the heart not the flesh. And that circumcision profits us if we keep the law, but if we don't keep the law, the circumcision counts as uncircumcision.

The types and symbols have been replaced by the reality, I agree. But the purpose of all the covenants was to bring us all, from Adam to the last man born on this planet, into line with God's holy law. To free us not from the law, but from the condemnation of the law because of sin. To make us righteous, holy, and obedient, as was the commendation given to Abraham.

Ge 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.


How could Abraham keep the Old Covenant law He gave to Moses 430 years before God gave it to Moses?

Circumcision was not of the Old Covenant law that God gave to Moses. God gave Abraham circumcision according to Jesus:

Jn 7:22 Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man.

And God gave Abraham circumcision as a sign?

Romans 4

6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.

8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.

10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.

11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

manichunter
Jun 22nd 2008, 06:02 AM
What post is that?


This one..........
Is spiritual torah real?

What is flesh reaps flesh, and what is spirit reaps spirit.
The written torah was a shadow applicable to a physical nation. The spiritual torah is the actual torah applicable to a spiritual kingdom under the guidance and lordship of the Holy Spirit.

Here is how spiritual torah applies in some examples not within the intelligence of most Christians. Most Christians are clueless concerning the whys.

1.Circumcision (Spiritually impregnated and adopted into a new spiritual kingdom by a spiritual covenant)
Physical circumcision is no longer practiced, but a person still has to be circumcised. Now circumcision is no longer physical but spiritual. Hence the shadow has been taken away but replaced by the actual. Why is circumcision still necessary? How is this circumcision done?

Ro 2:29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.

Jer 9:26 Egypt, Judah, Edom, the people of Ammon, Moab, and all who are in the farthest corners, who dwell in the wilderness. For all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in the heart."

2.Sacrificial offering system (Spiritually living and performing the ceremonial requirements of Torah)
The animal and meal offerings are no longer practiced, but a believer still has to offer sacrifices as a royal priest. Now sacrifices are no longer physical but spiritual. Hence the shadow has been taken away but replaced by the actual. How are sacrifices preformed? What did Paul mean by himself being used as a drink offering for others? Is God requiring the same from believers in order for them to be sacrifices?

1Pe 2:5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

Ro 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service.

Php 2:17 Yes, and if I am being poured out as a drink offering on the sacrifice and service of your faith, I am glad and rejoice with you all.

3.Commandments/Instructions for doctrine (Making talmidims of Jesus with the use of His commandments)
The written letter of the torah has been transplanted, but a believer stills needs to be disciplined and taught how to relate to God. Now the physical torah is no longer physical but spiritual. Hence the shadow has been taken away but replaced with the actual. The torah has been transplanted onto the spirit of a believer which made his adoption and citizenship complete in a New KINGOM. Why is the torah written on a believer’s heart? Why does Jesus tell us to keep his torah if we love Him?

Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

Ro 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Joh 14:15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments.

2Jo 1:6 This is love, that we walk according to His commandments. This is the commandment, that as you have heard from the beginning, you should walk in it.

Mt 28:19-20 19Go therefore F165 and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen. F166

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

4.We are actually held accountable to higher standard of torah since the revelation of spiritual torah has been manifested. Now we are judged and chastised for more than our actions but our motives and mindset have been added. We preach that the torah is done away with, but God is chastising and judging His saints for deeper things because the standards of the torah have been elevated and permanently engraved on our heart. What we do in flesh is a manifestation of our soul state of obedience to love and holiness in behavior and attitude. Hence the condition of a man’s soul bears fruit in our actions. So sin is to be known in our inward parts now, not just our acts, but now things like our bad attitude, pride, hate, and hypocrisy are included. It is now a sin to entertained adultery where as in the First Covenant just the act of committing adultery was judged as sin.

Jesus gave us the friend of the bridegroom to prepare His bride for the wedding. The Holy Spirit's job is to sanctify Christians post spiritual birth by removing the power of sin over their life. Only He as God knows what it takes to sanctify people who fool themselves (we all are born with a deceitful wicked heart that the Spirit has to expose and sanctify). Torah could never be accomplished in the flesh, but it can be accomplished by the Holy Spirit.

1Co 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Eze 36:27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.

Ro 8:4 that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Mt 15:11 Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man."

Mt 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

1Jo 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

Jer 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Jer 17:10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings

There is more…………. But I am sleepy, my flesh is weak and acting up LOL

brakelite
Jun 22nd 2008, 06:03 AM
How could Abraham keep the Old Covenant law He gave to Moses 430 years before God gave it to Moses?



What makes you think that the law of ten commandments which God wrote with His own finger on the tables of stone was made up on the day He gave it to Moses? As Israel had to observe the Sabbath with regards to the manna, and when they didn't God asked "How long will you refuse to keep My laws?"
This was before Sinai. So the Sabbath existed before Sinai, as did the other 9.

Naphal
Jun 22nd 2008, 06:07 AM
What makes you think that the law of ten commandments which God wrote with His own finger on the tables of stone was made up on the day He gave it to Moses? As Israel had to observe the Sabbath with regards to the manna, and when they didn't God asked "How long will you refuse to keep My laws?"
This was before Sinai. So the Sabbath existed before Sinai, as did the other 9.

Prove it.


Nehemiah 9:13 Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:
Nehemiah 9:14 And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:

Are these verses wrong Brakelite? Is it true that the Sabbath was given at Sinai as the scripture says or is it as you say that the Sabbath was given BEFORE Sinai?

ShirleyFord
Jun 22nd 2008, 06:45 AM
What makes you think that the law of ten commandments which God wrote with His own finger on the tables of stone was made up on the day He gave it to Moses? As Israel had to observe the Sabbath with regards to the manna, and when they didn't God asked "How long will you refuse to keep My laws?"
This was before Sinai. So the Sabbath existed before Sinai, as did the other 9.

Actually God set aside the 7th day of rest after He finished creation in the first 6 days of the creation week.

We do not find the word "sabbath' in the book of Genesis where all of the accounts of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and his twelve sons are written. The first time find the word "sabbath" in the Bible and God commanding man to keep it as a day of rest is in Exodus 16 when He gave the law of the sabbbath to those of the children of Israel who were not priests to keep His sabbath of rest by resting on the 7th day sabbath. By resting, He meant that they were to stay inside their dwellings and rest from all of their labors.

God didn't give the children of Israel the other 9 commandments at that time. We don't find the laws of all of the 10 commandments until Exodus 20 before He wrote the 10 commandments with His finger on 2 stones and gave them to Moses in Exodus 24.

He never gave the 10 commandments before then and certainly not to Abraham.

And Moses confirms He didn't in Deuteronomy 5 where we again find the laws of the 10 commandments.

2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.

3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

brakelite
Jun 22nd 2008, 06:47 AM
Prove it.


Nehemiah 9:13 Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:
Nehemiah 9:14 And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:

Are these verses wrong Brakelite? Is it true that the Sabbath was given at Sinai as the scripture says or is it as you say that the Sabbath was given BEFORE Sinai?

Exodus 16:22 ¶ And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man: and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses.
23 And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.
24 And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein.
25 And Moses said, Eat that to day; for to day is a sabbath unto the LORD: to day ye shall not find it in the field.
26 Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none.
27 And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none.
28 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?
29 See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.
30 So the people rested on the seventh day.

And when did all this take place?

Exodus 16:1 ¶ And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt.

And when did they come to Sinai?

Exodus 18:1 ¶ In the third month, when the children of Israel were gone forth out of the land of Egypt, the same day came they into the wilderness of Sinai.

Naphal
Jun 22nd 2008, 07:02 AM
Exodus 16:22 ¶ And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man: and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses.
23 And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.
24 And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein.
25 And Moses said, Eat that to day; for to day is a sabbath unto the LORD: to day ye shall not find it in the field.
26 Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none.
27 And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none.
28 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?
29 See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.
30 So the people rested on the seventh day.

And when did all this take place?

Exodus 16:1 ¶ And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt.




Any reason why you jumped from Exodus 16:22 to Exodus 16:1?

Does any of this change the fact that God said the Sabbath was made known at Sinai?


Nehemiah 9:13 Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:
Nehemiah 9:14 And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:

Are these verses wrong Brakelite? Is it true that the Sabbath was given at Sinai as the scripture says or is it as you say that the Sabbath was given BEFORE Sinai?

brakelite
Jun 22nd 2008, 07:18 AM
Any reason why you jumped from Exodus 16:22 to Exodus 16:1?

Does any of this change the fact that God said the Sabbath was made known at Sinai?


Nehemiah 9:13 Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:
Nehemiah 9:14 And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:

Are these verses wrong Brakelite? Is it true that the Sabbath was given at Sinai as the scripture says or is it as you say that the Sabbath was given BEFORE Sinai?

As I proved, the Sabbath was known to Moses and Israel before they got to Sinai. And God said to Moses, before He spoke it from the mount and before He wrote it on stone, that the Sabbath was an integral part of His law.
That Nehemiah wrote what he did simply means that God repeated Himself.

What is your purpose for stressing this? That Nehemiah contradicts his own written history? You asked me to prove that the Sabbath was known to Israel before the law was given to Moses at Sinai. I think I have done that.

Naphal
Jun 22nd 2008, 07:24 AM
As I proved, the Sabbath was known to Moses and Israel before they got to Sinai.

The scriptures say the Sabbath was not known until Sinai

Nehemiah 9:13 Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments:
Nehemiah 9:14 And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:




You asked me to prove that the Sabbath was known to Israel before the law was given to Moses at Sinai. I think I have done that.

Nothing has contradicted the scriptures I have provided.

brakelite
Jun 22nd 2008, 07:27 AM
Actually God set aside the 7th day of rest after He finished creation in the first 6 days of the creation week.

We do not find the word "sabbath' in the book of Genesis where all of the accounts of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and his twelve sons are written. The first time find the word "sabbath" in the Bible and God commanding man to keep it as a day of rest is in Exodus 16 when He gave the law of the sabbbath to those of the children of Israel who were not priests to keep His sabbath of rest by resting on the 7th day sabbath. By resting, He meant that they were to stay inside their dwellings and rest from all of their labors.

God didn't give the children of Israel the other 9 commandments at that time. We don't find the laws of all of the 10 commandments until Exodus 20 before He wrote the 10 commandments with His finger on 2 stones and gave them to Moses in Exodus 24.

He never gave the 10 commandments before then and certainly not to Abraham.

And Moses confirms He didn't in Deuteronomy 5 where we again find the laws of the 10 commandments.

2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.

3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.

After some looked for manna on the Sabbath and found none, God enquires of Moses, "how long refuse ye to keep My law? Thus it is abundantly clear that God had a law before it was written on stone. (Else how could Cain be found guilty of the sin of murder without the law? for without law there is no transgression) It is also abundantly clear that the Sabbath was a part of that law, regardless of it never being mentioned.
Tithing was only mentioned once (Abraham and Melchizadek) but surely we should not believe that that was the only occasion someone tithed/ It just happened that that was the only occasion the Holy Spirit saw fit to disclose to us. Because something is not written of does not mean that it is not there. I say this in regard to the Sabbath being kept by the patriarchs and by the NT church. (In the latter case it is there, though most refuse to recognise it.)

ravi4u2
Jun 22nd 2008, 12:58 PM
The Mosiac was covenant was different than the rest. They were personal covenants with God making a sole promise to an individual. The Mosiac covenant was a maritial covenant with a people God sanctified unto Himself. He replaced that maritial covenant with a new maritial covenant. The second maritial covenant is between Father and Son with the Holy Spirit being the friend of the Bridegroom. The believer is brought indirectly as a spouse like Boaz and Ruth.The marriage compact is called "the covenant of God" (Prov. 2:17), because the marriage was made in God's name.

A covenant is a mutual agreement between 2 or more persons to do or refrain from doing certain acts. Sometimes, this is the undertaking of one of the parties. In the Bible, God is regarded as the witness of this pact (Gen. 31:50, 1Sam. 20:8).
In the Old Testament, there are three different types of covenant:


A two-sided covenant between human parties, both of whom voluntarily accept the terms of the agreement (1Sam. 18:3,4; Mal. 2:14; Obad. 7).
A one-sided disposition imposed by a superior party (Ezek. 17:13,14). In this, God "commands" a covenant which man, the servant, is to obey (Josh. 23:16).
God's self-imposed obligation, for the reconciliation of sinners to Himself (Deut. 7:6-8; Ps. 89:3,4).

God made several such covenants in the Bible:

*Edenic, God's promise of redemption (Gen. 3:15).
*Noahic, for the preservation of the race (Gen. 9:9).
*Abrahamic, granting blessings through Abram's family (Gen. 15:18).
*Mosaic, designating Israel as God's chosen people (Exod. 19:5,6).
*Levitical, making reconciliation through priestly atonement (Num. 25:12,13).
*Davidic, Messianic salvation promised through David's dynasty (2Sam. 23:5). The prophets foretold a New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-34) which would center in a person (Isa. 42:6; 49:8). In the New Covenant, the Covenant of Grace, man is placed in right relationship to God through Christ (Heb. 7:22; 8:6-13; 2Cor. 3:6-18).

Covenant is a legal concept often used in the Bible as a metaphor to describe the relationship between God and humankind. The biblical usage was derived from ancient secular usage, where covenant meant a binding and solemn agreement between two or more parties. There were different kinds of covenants in the biblical world, however, just as there are different kinds of contracts today. One type of ancient covenant that serves as a model for certain biblical passages is the royal grant. In this type of covenant, a king or other person in authority rewards a loyal subject by granting him an office, land, exemption from taxes, or the like. It is typical of such covenants that only the superior party binds himself; conditions are not imposed on the inferior party. Such covenants are also referred to as covenants of promise or unconditional covenants. The covenants God made with Noah (Gen. 9:8 - 17), Abraham (Gen. 15:18), and David (2 Sam. 7; 23:5) fit this pattern. In each of these cases, it is God alone who binds himself by a solemn oath to keep the covenant.

The Mosaic covenant (Ex. 19 - 24; Deut.; Josh. 24), seems to have been modeled on another type of ancient covenant, the political treaty between a powerful king and his weaker vassal. Following the standard form of such treaties, God, the suzerain, reminds Israel, the vassal, how God has saved it, and Israel in response accepts the covenant stipulations. Israel is promised a blessing for obedience and a curse for breaking the covenant.
These two different conceptions of covenant, one stressing promise, the other obligation, eventually modified one another.

Jesus Christ added a third model, that of a last will and testament. At the Last Supper, he interpreted his own life and death as the perfect covenant (Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20). The idea of a covenant between God and humankind lies at the heart of the Bible. This idea explains the selection of the word testament, a synonym for covenant, in naming the two parts of the Bible.

ShirleyFord
Jun 23rd 2008, 05:29 PM
After some looked for manna on the Sabbath and found none, God enquires of Moses, "how long refuse ye to keep My law?

Let's look at all that God had told them to do before we get to Exodus 16 and see what it was that the children of Israel had failed to do that God had told them to do;

We find the first law God gives them is the law of the Lord's passover way back in Exodus 12 while they were still in Egypt.

Exodus 12:11 And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD's passover.

The Feast of Passover was when they were to eat he Lord's passover and was a yearly high sabbath. But it was not included in the law of the 10 commandments.

This is the command or law that God which Moses gave the Hebrews to do:

Exodus 12:

21 Then Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said unto them, Draw out and take you a lamb according to your families, and kill the passover. 22 And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the basin; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning. 23 For the LORD will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts, the LORD will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you.

26 And it shall come to pass, when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service? 27 That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the LORD's passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped.

We find that the children of Israel obeyed God in all that He told them to do concerning keeping the Lord's passover:

28 And the children of Israel went away, and did as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they.

God had given Moses the law of what exactly the children of Israel would do next when Pharoh finally agreed to "Let my people go."


Exodus 11
2 Speak now in the ears of the people, and let every man borrow of his neighbor, and every woman of her neighbor, jewels of silver and jewels of gold.


And we find the children of Israel obeying God's law.


Exodus 12
35 And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment:


This is the next law that God gave Moses that the children of Israel were to observe and do:

Exodus 12
31 And he called for Moses and Aaron by night, and said, Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go, serve the LORD, as ye have said. 32 Also take your flocks and your herds, as ye have said, and be gone; and bless me also.


We find that the children of Israel obeyed this law of the Lord right down to the smallest detail, except for one. God had added, "bless me also."


Exodus 12
37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. 38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.


Now the children of Israel was to kill the passover lamb from each of their families while they were still in Egypt but they were not to keep the law of the passover feast - one of the Lord's yearly sabbath feasts, high sabbaths - by cooking the passover lamb and eating unleavened bread with it until they were completely out of Egypt.

This is what Moses commanded them to do after they killed the lamb the day before they left Egypt:


Exodus 12

3 Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house: 4 And if the household be too little for the lamb, let him and his neighbor next unto his house take it according to the number of the souls; every man according to his eating shall make your count for the lamb. 5 Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats:

7 And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses, wherein they shall eat it.

Moses gave them the ordinances or laws for keeping the Lord's passover and the Lord's passover feast, a sabbath unto the Lord, that they were to keep every year when they came out of Egypt.

But while they were still in Egypt, they couldn't observe the Lord's passover feast by eating the Lord's passover lamb in their houses where they lived in Egypt. But they were to bring all of the Lord's lambs with them as they came out of Egypt that they had killed in Egypt and placed the blood of each lamb on each door post where each family of the children of Israel lived.

And they were to also take unleavened bread with them also to be eaten with their roasted lambs when they came out of Egypt.

Exodus 12
17 And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt: therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever.

And we find that they obeyed the law that God gave them for unleaved bread;

Exodus 12
34 And the people took their dough before it was leavened, their kneadingtroughs being bound up in their clothes upon their shoulders. 39 And they baked unleavened cakes of the dough which they brought forth out of Egypt, for it was not leavened; because they were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry, neither had they prepared for themselves any victual.


Then after they crossed through the Red Sea into the wilderness of Sinai, the children of Israel kept the Lord's passover feast:

Num 9:4 And Moses spake unto the children of Israel, that they should keep the passover. 5 And they kept the passover on the fourteenth day of the first month at even in the wilderness of Sinai: according to all that the LORD commanded Moses, so did the children of Israel.


We find that the children of Israel obeyed by doing every last thing of each of the laws of the ordinance or law that God had given Moses for them to obey right down to the t. But the Lord had also added, "and bless me" in Exodus 12:32.

Many would say that we bless the Lord by obeying, actually doing all that He has commanded us to do. But as we will see through the children of Israel, we are not blessing the Lord until we acknowledge that it is God who has delivered us and done the work by "letting praise be continually in our mouth" for all that He has done, regardless of how much of His laws we actually physically do.

We find that as soon as God delivered the children of Israel out of Egypt into the wilderness along the banks of the Red Sea before they crossed it, they began to cry out against God instead of blessing Him:


Exodus 14
10 And when Pharaoh drew nigh, the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and, behold, the Egyptians marched after them; and they were sore afraid: and the children of Israel cried out unto the LORD. 11 And they said unto Moses, Because there were no graves in Egypt, hast thou taken us away to die in the wilderness? wherefore hast thou dealt thus with us, to carry us forth out of Egypt? 12 Is not this the word that we did tell thee in Egypt, saying, Let us alone, that we may serve the Egyptians? For it had been better for us to serve the Egyptians, than that we should die in the wilderness.

They still didn't have faith in God to do the work and deliver them completely. They had more faith in Pharoah and his people and what he would do to them than faith in God to deliver them from Pharoah and everything that he might think to do to them. In other words, they didn't believe God's word that He had given to Moses to preach to them:

Exodus 6
6 Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments

They didn't mix their works with faith in God. And works without faith is dead, James tells us. And faith without works is dead. But faith and works together produces life.

When they started crying out to God by speaking to Moses, God told Moses to speak to them and tell them "Fear not' and to go forward to the Red Sea:

Exodus 14

13 And Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which he will show to you to day: for the Egyptians whom ye have seen to day, ye shall see them again no more for ever. 14 The LORD shall fight for you, and ye shall hold your peace. 15 And the LORD said unto Moses, Wherefore criest thou unto me? speak unto the children of Israel, that they go forward:


And we read from v. 16-17 God commanding Moses to stretch out his rod over the sea to divide it so the children of Israel could walk across it on dry ground:

16 But lift thou up thy rod, and stretch out thine hand over the sea, and divide it: and the children of Israel shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea. 17 And I, behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow them: and I will get me honor upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen.

18 And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I have gotten me honor upon Pharaoh, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen.

And in the rest of Exodus 14 we find that God did exactly as He promised the children of Israel in delivering them through the Red Sea;



God didn't bless the children of Israel by delivering them out of Egypt and out of the hand of Pharoh completely based on their obedience in doing the physical all the physical outward works of the law of the Lord's passover. He had promised them that He would deliver them out of Egypt and out of the hands of Pharoah when Moses spoke to them when he first came before Pharoah and commanded him, "Let my people go."

And even Israel's murmuring against the Lord instead of blessing Him didn't hinder or prevent Him from making God on the promises that He had promised them.

And after God delivered them out of Egypt through the other side, we finally see in Exodus 15 the children of Israel blessing and praising the Lord with all of their might.

But they began murmuring again soon afterwards when they became physically thirsty for natural earthly water:


Exodus 15

22 So Moses brought Israel from the Red sea, and they went out into the wilderness of Shur; and they went three days in the wilderness, and found no water. 23 And when they came to Marah, they could not drink of the waters of Marah, for they were bitter: therefore the name of it was called Marah. 24 And the people murmured against Moses, saying, What shall we drink?

25 And he cried unto the LORD; and the LORD showed him a tree, which when he had cast into the waters, the waters were made sweet: there he made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved them,

And after the children of Israel drank of the water that God gave them and their natural thirst for natural water was quenched and after God settled them in a camp where their were 12 palm trees surrounded by waters that never ran dry so that they never had a lack of water and plenty of it, they became physically hungry. And again they murmured against God not trusting Him to take care of their needs. And forgetting the horrible bondage that their were under as slaves in Egypt, they now instead are looking back to Egypt longing for Egypt to supply their needs.

Now we come to Exodus 16;


Exodus 16

1 And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt. 2 And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness: 3 And the children of Israel said unto them, Would to God we had died by the hand of the LORD in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots, and when we did eat bread to the full; for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with hunger.


They see themseves as servants of the god they serve only as their god becomes their servant after they have served him by doing what he has asked them to do. And then expect him to do for them what they ask of him. But as we see throughout the pages of the Bible from cover to cover that is not how our true and only God operates.

Just as God delivered the children of Israel throughthe Red Sea when the children of Israel cried out against God after looking back and seeing Pharoah and his armies pursuing them and gaining ground on them - just as God gave them natural water to them after they became thirsty and cried out against God - He quenched their hunger by giving them manna from heaven.

Exodus 16

4 Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no. 5 And it shall come to pass, that on the sixth day they shall prepare that which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily.

Then God gives them them manna and the law of manna, out of which he gave them the law of the weekly sabbath. Five of the weekly days the law of manna was the same for gathering and eating the manna. But God gave a different laws for gathering the manna and eating it on the sixth and seventh day of the week, the sabbath day.


Exodus 16

4 Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no. 19 And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning. 20 Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them left of it until the morning, and it bred worms, and stank: and Moses was wroth with them.


5 And it shall come to pass, that on the sixth day they shall prepare that which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily. 23 And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.

24 And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein. 25 And Moses said, Eat that to day; for to day is a sabbath unto the LORD: to day ye shall not find it in the field. 26 Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none.

27 And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none.

28 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?

29 See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days;abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.


Shirley

keck553
Jun 23rd 2008, 05:49 PM
As far as I can tell from the bible, there are 6 days, then Shabbat.

Gen 2:3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.

sanctify: in the Hebrew manuscript the word is "Kodesh" that is set apart from the other days.

The Hebrew calender has six days and then shabbat. God set up the days, and the calendar, not Moses, and not the Jews.

God doesn't change.

Or is it now the 9 commandments??

davidandme
Jun 23rd 2008, 07:11 PM
Very well said. :)

Naphal
Jun 24th 2008, 03:48 AM
Or is it now the 9 commandments??





Christ only re-iterated 9 of the original ten. The Sabbath day was not included.

davidandme
Jun 24th 2008, 01:06 PM
Jesus created the Sabbath. Can you say that He said later not to keep it?

John 1:3
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all.

There no better blind than some one who doesn't want to see. (this is not in the Bible) :)

jewel4Christ
Jun 24th 2008, 01:24 PM
Jesus created the Sabbath. Can you say that He said later not to keep it?

John 1:3
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

James 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all.

There no better blind than some one who doesn't want to see. (this is not in the Bible) :)


Are you saying that you keep the law perfectly? If not, you are then guilty of all.

That is why it was a law unto death/condemnation.


peaceandlove,

janet

jewel4Christ
Jun 24th 2008, 01:32 PM
Let's look at all that God had told them to do before we get to Exodus 16 and see what it was that the children of Israel had failed to do that God had told them to do;

We find the first law God gives them is the law of the Lord's passover way back in Exodus 12 while they were still in Egypt.

Exodus 12:11 And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD's passover.

The Feast of Passover was when they were to eat he Lord's passover and was a yearly high sabbath. But it was not included in the law of the 10 commandments.

This is the command or law that God which Moses gave the Hebrews to do:

Exodus 12:

21 Then Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said unto them, Draw out and take you a lamb according to your families, and kill the passover. 22 And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the basin; and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning. 23 For the LORD will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts, the LORD will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you.

26 And it shall come to pass, when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service? 27 That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the LORD's passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped.

We find that the children of Israel obeyed God in all that He told them to do concerning keeping the Lord's passover:

28 And the children of Israel went away, and did as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they.

God had given Moses the law of what exactly the children of Israel would do next when Pharoh finally agreed to "Let my people go."


Exodus 11
2 Speak now in the ears of the people, and let every man borrow of his neighbor, and every woman of her neighbor, jewels of silver and jewels of gold.


And we find the children of Israel obeying God's law.


Exodus 12
35 And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment:


This is the next law that God gave Moses that the children of Israel were to observe and do:

Exodus 12
31 And he called for Moses and Aaron by night, and said, Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go, serve the LORD, as ye have said. 32 Also take your flocks and your herds, as ye have said, and be gone; and bless me also.


We find that the children of Israel obeyed this law of the Lord right down to the smallest detail, except for one. God had added, "bless me also."


Exodus 12
37 And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children. 38 And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.


Now the children of Israel was to kill the passover lamb from each of their families while they were still in Egypt but they were not to keep the law of the passover feast - one of the Lord's yearly sabbath feasts, high sabbaths - by cooking the passover lamb and eating unleavened bread with it until they were completely out of Egypt.

This is what Moses commanded them to do after they killed the lamb the day before they left Egypt:


Exodus 12

3 Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying, In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to the house of their fathers, a lamb for an house: 4 And if the household be too little for the lamb, let him and his neighbor next unto his house take it according to the number of the souls; every man according to his eating shall make your count for the lamb. 5 Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats:

7 And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses, wherein they shall eat it.

Moses gave them the ordinances or laws for keeping the Lord's passover and the Lord's passover feast, a sabbath unto the Lord, that they were to keep every year when they came out of Egypt.

But while they were still in Egypt, they couldn't observe the Lord's passover feast by eating the Lord's passover lamb in their houses where they lived in Egypt. But they were to bring all of the Lord's lambs with them as they came out of Egypt that they had killed in Egypt and placed the blood of each lamb on each door post where each family of the children of Israel lived.

And they were to also take unleavened bread with them also to be eaten with their roasted lambs when they came out of Egypt.

Exodus 12
17 And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt: therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever.

And we find that they obeyed the law that God gave them for unleaved bread;

Exodus 12
34 And the people took their dough before it was leavened, their kneadingtroughs being bound up in their clothes upon their shoulders. 39 And they baked unleavened cakes of the dough which they brought forth out of Egypt, for it was not leavened; because they were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry, neither had they prepared for themselves any victual.


Then after they crossed through the Red Sea into the wilderness of Sinai, the children of Israel kept the Lord's passover feast:

Num 9:4 And Moses spake unto the children of Israel, that they should keep the passover. 5 And they kept the passover on the fourteenth day of the first month at even in the wilderness of Sinai: according to all that the LORD commanded Moses, so did the children of Israel.


We find that the children of Israel obeyed by doing every last thing of each of the laws of the ordinance or law that God had given Moses for them to obey right down to the t. But the Lord had also added, "and bless me" in Exodus 12:32.

Many would say that we bless the Lord by obeying, actually doing all that He has commanded us to do. But as we will see through the children of Israel, we are not blessing the Lord until we acknowledge that it is God who has delivered us and done the work by "letting praise be continually in our mouth" for all that He has done, regardless of how much of His laws we actually physically do.

We find that as soon as God delivered the children of Israel out of Egypt into the wilderness along the banks of the Red Sea before they crossed it, they began to cry out against God instead of blessing Him:


Exodus 14
10 And when Pharaoh drew nigh, the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and, behold, the Egyptians marched after them; and they were sore afraid: and the children of Israel cried out unto the LORD. 11 And they said unto Moses, Because there were no graves in Egypt, hast thou taken us away to die in the wilderness? wherefore hast thou dealt thus with us, to carry us forth out of Egypt? 12 Is not this the word that we did tell thee in Egypt, saying, Let us alone, that we may serve the Egyptians? For it had been better for us to serve the Egyptians, than that we should die in the wilderness.

They still didn't have faith in God to do the work and deliver them completely. They had more faith in Pharoah and his people and what he would do to them than faith in God to deliver them from Pharoah and everything that he might think to do to them. In other words, they didn't believe God's word that He had given to Moses to preach to them:

Exodus 6
6 Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments

They didn't mix their works with faith in God. And works without faith is dead, James tells us. And faith without works is dead. But faith and works together produces life.

When they started crying out to God by speaking to Moses, God told Moses to speak to them and tell them "Fear not' and to go forward to the Red Sea:

Exodus 14

13 And Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which he will show to you to day: for the Egyptians whom ye have seen to day, ye shall see them again no more for ever. 14 The LORD shall fight for you, and ye shall hold your peace. 15 And the LORD said unto Moses, Wherefore criest thou unto me? speak unto the children of Israel, that they go forward:


And we read from v. 16-17 God commanding Moses to stretch out his rod over the sea to divide it so the children of Israel could walk across it on dry ground:

16 But lift thou up thy rod, and stretch out thine hand over the sea, and divide it: and the children of Israel shall go on dry ground through the midst of the sea. 17 And I, behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians, and they shall follow them: and I will get me honor upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen.

18 And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I have gotten me honor upon Pharaoh, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen.

And in the rest of Exodus 14 we find that God did exactly as He promised the children of Israel in delivering them through the Red Sea;



God didn't bless the children of Israel by delivering them out of Egypt and out of the hand of Pharoh completely based on their obedience in doing the physical all the physical outward works of the law of the Lord's passover. He had promised them that He would deliver them out of Egypt and out of the hands of Pharoah when Moses spoke to them when he first came before Pharoah and commanded him, "Let my people go."

And even Israel's murmuring against the Lord instead of blessing Him didn't hinder or prevent Him from making God on the promises that He had promised them.

And after God delivered them out of Egypt through the other side, we finally see in Exodus 15 the children of Israel blessing and praising the Lord with all of their might.

But they began murmuring again soon afterwards when they became physically thirsty for natural earthly water:


Exodus 15

22 So Moses brought Israel from the Red sea, and they went out into the wilderness of Shur; and they went three days in the wilderness, and found no water. 23And when they came to Marah, they could not drink of the waters of Marah, for they were bitter: therefore the name of it was called Marah. 24And the people murmured against Moses, saying, What shall we drink?

25 And he cried unto the LORD; and the LORD showed him a tree, which when he had cast into the waters, the waters were made sweet: there he made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved them,

And after the children of Israel drank of the water that God gave them and their natural thirst for natural water was quenched and after God settled them in a camp where their were 12 palm trees surrounded by waters that never ran dry so that they never had a lack of water and plenty of it, they became physically hungry. And again they murmured against God not trusting Him to take care of their needs. And forgetting the horrible bondage that their were under as slaves in Egypt, they now instead are looking back to Egypt longing for Egypt to supply their needs.

Now we come to Exodus 16;


Exodus 16

1 And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt. 2 And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness: 3 And the children of Israel said unto them, Would to God we had died by the hand of the LORD in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots, and when we did eat bread to the full; for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with hunger.


They see themseves as servants of the god they serve only as their god becomes their servant after they have served him by doing what he has asked them to do. And then expect him to do for them what they ask of him. But as we see throughout the pages of the Bible from cover to cover that is not how our true and only God operates.

Just as God delivered the children of Israel throughthe Red Sea when the children of Israel cried out against God after looking back and seeing Pharoah and his armies pursuing them and gaining ground on them - just as God gave them natural water to them after they became thirsty and cried out against God - He quenched their hunger by giving them manna from heaven.

Exodus 16

4 Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no. 5 And it shall come to pass, that on the sixth day they shall prepare that which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily.

Then God gives them them manna and the law of manna, out of which he gave them the law of the weekly sabbath. Five of the weekly days the law of manna was the same for gathering and eating the manna. But God gave a different laws for gathering the manna and eating it on the sixth and seventh day of the week, the sabbath day.


Exodus 16

4 Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no. 19 And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning. 20 Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them left of it until the morning, and it bred worms, and stank: and Moses was wroth with them.


5 And it shall come to pass, that on the sixth day they shall prepare that which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily. 23 And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.

24 And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein. 25 And Moses said, Eat that to day; for to day is a sabbath unto the LORD: to day ye shall not find it in the field. 26 Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none.

27 And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none.

28 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?

29 See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days;abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.


Shirley





Hi Shirley,

Good post!

The "law" that they broke was the law of faith.

They did not have faith in what God promised.

Because of transgressions, (of the law of faith), God added the stone type to bring about condemnation...430 years later.

Deut 32:20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end [shall be]: for they [are] a very froward generation, children in whom [is] no faith.

peaceandlove,

janet

davidandme
Jun 24th 2008, 02:04 PM
The Law's job is to condemn us. Because we sin. The problem is not the Law, the problem is us. The Law is like a mirror. We can't be saved by the Law. The Law point us to sin. Sin is the transgression of the Law. Jesus saves us from sin, not from the Law. If we have no Law we would't realize that we need Jesus and a Savior. God bless.

LaidDownHisLIfe
Jun 24th 2008, 04:12 PM
i think a summary for us who walk in grace:
there is only one way for us all to be saved- by His wonderous grace!
anything that emphasises anything but this salvation by grace[knowing that grace teaches us to say no to ungodliness], is a distraction, weather it be isreal, or any other eathly nation.



our focus needs to be;"set your heart on things above."

Naphal
Jun 24th 2008, 09:10 PM
Jesus created the Sabbath. Can you say that He said later not to keep it?

At first we kept a day, now we keep something greater than one day as the Sabbath.

Naphal
Jun 24th 2008, 09:20 PM
The problem is not the Law, the problem is us.

If that were true then there would have been no need for the second covenant. The first had faults so that means there was a problem not only with mankind but also with the first law.


Hebrews 8:7 For if that first had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

brakelite
Jun 24th 2008, 10:06 PM
If that were true then there would have been no need for the second covenant. The first had faults so that means there was a problem not only with mankind but also with the first law.


Hebrews 8:7 For if that first had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

We know that the ten commandment law (and you have said this yourself) was given to point out to mankind that they have not met God's holy standard of righteousness and thus need a Saviour. Correct?

I am sure you would agree that it has done a commendable job of accomplishing that for which it was designed.

Tell me therefore, how then was the ten commandment law faulty, if it has done such a perfect job of fulfilling it's obligations? What is faulty about it when it is a representation of the righteous character of God?

You may say that it was faulty because it couldn't save us. And I am sure you would be able to provide ample evidence to that effect. So could I. No argument with you on that on. But was that what the ten commandment law was designed for? No. It was designed for a specific job, and it has done that admirably. Stop condemning it because it doesn't do what it wasn't designed to do. The ten commandments are not faulty, never were, and never will be.

Those texts which claim fault with the old covenant are not referring to the ten commandments. If they were, they would be inflicting much damage to so many other scriptures from both the old and new testaments that state exactly the opposite.

jewel4Christ
Jun 24th 2008, 10:26 PM
We know that the ten commandment law (and you have said this yourself) was given to point out to mankind that they have not met God's holy standard of righteousness and thus need a Saviour. Correct?

I am sure you would agree that it has done a commendable job of accomplishing that for which it was designed.

Tell me therefore, how then was the ten commandment law faulty, if it has done such a perfect job of fulfilling it's obligations? What is faulty about it when it is a representation of the righteous character of God?

You may say that it was faulty because it couldn't save us. And I am sure you would be able to provide ample evidence to that effect. So could I. No argument with you on that on. But was that what the ten commandment law was designed for? No. It was designed for a specific job, and it has done that admirably. Stop condemning it because it doesn't do what it wasn't designed to do. The ten commandments are not faulty, never were, and never will be.

Those texts which claim fault with the old covenant are not referring to the ten commandments. If they were, they would be inflicting much damage to so many other scriptures from both the old and new testaments that state exactly the opposite.

The bible is clear that the law works only WRATH, and that is a CURSE on us.

Why do you guys change things?


I don't get it.

IF the law was not a curse, and did not only work wrath, we would NOT need a new covenant....as already stated.

peaceandlove,

janet

davidandme
Jun 25th 2008, 12:48 AM
Jesus and the Sabbath are two different things. Jesus is the creator and the Sabbath day is a creation. This creation is also a commandmant given by Jesus himself at Mount Sinai. The Sabbath did not become Jesus neither Jesus became the Sabbath. God bless you always.

brakelite
Jun 25th 2008, 12:52 AM
The bible is clear that the law works only WRATH, and that is a CURSE on us.

Why do you guys change things?


I don't get it.

IF the law was not a curse, and did not only work wrath, we would NOT need a new covenant....as already stated.

peaceandlove,

janet

Why does it work wrath?
Because of your sin, correct?
The law is a mirror. It accurately informs us of our true nature and standing before God. Our nature is sinful, and our standing is zero.
Now, if Jesus removed the law, what then would you have to convict you of your need of a Saviour? The law certainly does not cleanse us from sin, just as the mirror doesn't cleanse us from dirt. But the law is still necessary, even for the Christian, to inform him of where the dirt is. Just like a mirror.
And every time we look to the law and discover some discrepancy or fault within that does not measure up to the standard God has set for us,, then we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, and if we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
The law or mirror does the necessary identification of that which needs cleansing, and the blood of Jesus does the necessary cleansing. Both work in tandem with one another, both are essential, one cannot work without the other.

What was done away at the cross were those types and symbols that pointed forward to Jesus. They were the ordinances that Moses wrote in a book as a lesson book or schoolmaster and formed a pictorial gospel for Israel.

Once Jesus came, the pictorial show was superseded by the reality of Christ Himself. The law of ten commandments however was and is essential to both times, before and after the cross.

jewel4Christ
Jun 25th 2008, 01:17 AM
Why does it work wrath?
Because of your sin, correct?Yes



he law is a mirror. It accurately informs us of our true nature and standing before God. Our nature is sinful, and our standing is zero.
Now, if Jesus removed the law, what then would you have to convict you of your need of a Saviour?The law convicted me of my need for a Savior, since then, I am no longer under the schoolmaster, as it states.

It done it's deed.


The law certainly does not cleanse us from sin, just as the mirror doesn't cleanse us from dirt. But the law is still necessary, even for the Christian, to inform him of where the dirt is. Just like a mirror.No, the holy spirit does that, once you are removed from the curse of the law, and repent....the stone law only shows us how we are guilty in the face of a carnal law, the holy spirit shows us the true intents of God's heart..where we now can see that although the law said, do not kill, He now can tell us by the spirit to not even hate.

The carnal, stone law was insufficient to show us anything other than sin in the CARNAL man, as we see written.

Yet, all God needed to condemn a carnal man was a carnal law...do you see?



And every time we look to the law and discover some discrepancy or fault within that does not measure up to the standard God has set for us,, then we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, and if we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. His standard is actually higher, read math. 5...(for christians, that is, the carnal/stone law was made only for those outside of Christ, as we see written.)



The law or mirror does the necessary identification of that which needs cleansing, and the blood of Jesus does the necessary cleansing. Both work in tandem with one another, both are essential, one cannot work without the other.

What was done away at the cross were those types and symbols that pointed forward to Jesus. They were the ordinances that Moses wrote in a book as a lesson book or schoolmaster and formed a pictorial gospel for Israel.
How can that be, those things NEVER condemned us to begin with? It was the STONE law that brought about our condemnation....not the other form of law.



Once Jesus came, the pictorial show was superseded by the reality of Christ Himself. The law of ten commandments however was and is essential to both times, before and after the cross.
Disagree.

The bible says it is the stone law that was done away at the cross for christians, because it works the curse in us. The ceremonial laws did not do this, you see? They only pointed to a reality, but never worked a curse, or brought about wrath to us...so, you are misunderstanding.


peaceandlove,

janet

jewel4Christ
Jun 25th 2008, 01:20 AM
btw, I am not insinuating that the ceremonial law is still binding, either, for in reality, it was fulfilled in Christ...and, likewise HE also fulfilled the stone part for us, because we could not live up to it, perfectly, and it required perfection..as we see written.

People say they keep the law, and, they are fooling themselves...but, they are not fooling God.....:idea:

peaceandlove,

janet

ShirleyFord
Jun 25th 2008, 01:46 AM
After some looked for manna on the Sabbath and found none, God enquires of Moses, "how long refuse ye to keep My law? Thus it is abundantly clear that God had a law before it was written on stone. (Else how could Cain be found guilty of the sin of murder without the law? for without law there is no transgression) It is also abundantly clear that the Sabbath was a part of that law, regardless of it never being mentioned.
Tithing was only mentioned once (Abraham and Melchizadek) but surely we should not believe that that was the only occasion someone tithed/ It just happened that that was the only occasion the Holy Spirit saw fit to disclose to us. Because something is not written of does not mean that it is not there. I say this in regard to the Sabbath being kept by the patriarchs and by the NT church. (In the latter case it is there, though most refuse to recognise it.)

Tithing was not one of the 10 commandments. Genesis 14 when Abraham gave 10% of the spoils of war he gained to Melchizadek (not 10% of his personal wealth), the heavenly high priest, the order of the priesthood of Jesus, our High Priest and His priests, all true believers since Adam.

You are mistaken that the practice of "tithing" is found only that one time in the Bible.

We find Israel tithing at the command of King Hezekiah in 2 Chronicles 31:

2 And Hezekiah appointed the courses of the priests and the Levites after their courses, every man according to his service, the priests and Levites for burnt offerings and for peace offerings, to minister, and to give thanks, and to praise in the gates of the tents of the LORD.

3 He appointed also the king's portion of his substance for the burnt offerings, to wit, for the morning and evening burnt offerings, and the burnt offerings for the sabbaths, and for the new moons, and for the set feasts, as it is written in the law of the LORD.

4 Moreover he commanded the people that dwelt in Jerusalem to give the portion of the priests and the Levites, that they might be encouraged in the law of the LORD.

5 And as soon as the commandment came abroad, the children of Israel brought in abundance the firstfruits of corn, wine, and oil, and honey, and of all the increase of the field; and the tithe of all things brought they in abundantly.

6 And concerning the children of Israel and Judah, that dwelt in the cities of Judah, they also brought in the tithe of oxen and sheep, and the tithe of holy things which were consecrated unto the LORD their God, and laid them by heaps.





We find Israel tithing at the command of Nehemiah in Nehemiah 13:

7 And I came to Jerusalem, and understood of the evil that Eliashib did for Tobiah, in preparing him a chamber in the courts of the house of God.

8 And it grieved me sore: therefore I cast forth all the household stuff to Tobiah out of the chamber.

9 Then I commanded, and they cleansed the chambers: and thither brought I again the vessels of the house of God, with the meat offering and the frankincense.

10 And I perceived that the portions of the Levites had not been given them: for the Levites and the singers, that did the work, were fled every one to his field.

11 Then contended I with the rulers, and said, Why is the house of God forsaken? And I gathered them together, and set them in their place.

12 Then brought all Judah the tithe of the corn and the new wine and the oil unto the treasuries.


If you are not tithing this way then you are not tithing according to the law.



Shirley

Naphal
Jun 25th 2008, 06:32 AM
We know that the ten commandment law (and you have said this yourself) was given to point out to mankind that they have not met God's holy standard of righteousness and thus need a Saviour. Correct?

No. I never said that. The ten commandments were given as the first ten set of rules of the covenant, and many more rules/laws/commandments came as part of that covenant. These rules establish what is wrong to do and what the punishment is, and some declared what needed to be done and the punishment for not doing it. Nothing about the ten being "given to point out to mankind that they have not met God's holy standard of righteousness and thus need a Saviour" is mentioned in the text.




Tell me therefore, how then was the ten commandment law faulty, if it has done such a perfect job of fulfilling it's obligations? What is faulty about it when it is a representation of the righteous character of God?

Scripture speaks of the first covenant, including the law of it, as being faulty. It does not specify the exact faults or what laws or commands were faulty. As a whole, it was faulty.



You may say that it was faulty because it couldn't save us. And I am sure you would be able to provide ample evidence to that effect. So could I. No argument with you on that on. But was that what the ten commandment law was designed for? No. It was designed for a specific job, and it has done that admirably. Stop condemning it because it doesn't do what it wasn't designed to do. The ten commandments are not faulty, never were, and never will be.

Again, scripture speaks as the law as a whole as being faulty. No one is condemning anything, and certainly not outside of what is already written in the scriptures. If I say there was faults and that's why it was replaced it is only because scripture says it. You don't care for that position but I am the wrong person to argue about it with since I didn't write the scriptures that speak of the law in this manner.




Those texts which claim fault with the old covenant are not referring to the ten commandments.

So you say but the scriptures do not excuse the ten, nor specify them. The law is all the law.

Naphal
Jun 25th 2008, 06:38 AM
Now, if Jesus removed the law, what then would you have to convict you of your need of a Saviour?

Jesus removed the old law and set in it's place a new, better law attached with a new and better covenant. Why do you continue to suggest we claim there is no law at all when I and many others have made clear to you the only law removed is the old covenant law and the only law in effect is the new covenant law which is not exactly the same as the old. You're response is without any basis. It's only any good against new people that may not know how to answer you but you already know your question is faulty so why do you persist in asking it?

brakelite
Jun 28th 2008, 10:21 AM
Jesus removed the old law and set in it's place a new, better law attached with a new and better covenant. Why do you continue to suggest we claim there is no law at all when I and many others have made clear to you the only law removed is the old covenant law and the only law in effect is the new covenant law which is not exactly the same as the old. You're response is without any basis. It's only any good against new people that may not know how to answer you but you already know your question is faulty so why do you persist in asking it?

Actually, Jesus did not give anyone any new law. What He did, and what Isaiah prophecied He would do, was to put the magnifying glass to it and reveal it for what it truly was.
The Pharisees thought they had it sussed. Because they didn't physically and personally kill anyone they considered themselves perfect when it came to the 4th commandment. But Jesus told them that because they hated, they were as guilty of premeditated murder as anyone who had weilded the sword.
The same with adultery. But lust condemned them as much as the act. Jesus did not make the law harder, nor did He alter it, He very simply showed the true nature of it from of old. His way (for He gave it in the first place) was the only way to observe the law.
Then He summarised the entire law by condensing it into the 2 love laws. But even they were not new, except to the ignorant hearers at the time. But they were direct quotes from torah, and are the foundation of the law and prophets.

My whole theology on his matter is in the belief that because the law is a reflection of the character and righteousness of God, and because God does not change, therefore neither cannot the law change.(I speak of the ten commandments).
The fact that the letter to the Hebrews states clearly the a law has changed, means that whatever law changed, it had nothing to do with that law that reflected the character of God. Because God does not change.
Thus there is more than just one law. As I have contended from the beginning. And which you deny. But how you get around the above logic of my reasoning I am not sure.

losthorizon
Jun 28th 2008, 11:55 AM
Actually, Jesus did not give anyone any new law.
Actually, there has been a complete “disannulling” of the Old Covenant which included the Law of Moses – why – because there could not be perfection by the Levitical priesthood. That is why Messiah came to offer Himself as the perfect sacrifice. Jesus is our perfect high priest – not after the order of Aaron but after the order of Melchisedec. And in order for Jesus to be a priest there was of necessity a change in the OT law – not some amendment but a complete and total change – why – because "Our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood". Jesus could not be our high preist if the OT was still in force. That is why it was nailed to the cross with Him… "he canceled the bond which stood against us with its legal demands; this he set aside, nailing it to the cross" (Col. 2:14).
The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. Psalms 110:4

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. Hebrews 7:11-14

brakelite
Jun 28th 2008, 12:18 PM
Actually, there has been a complete “disannulling” of the Old Covenant which included the Law of Moses – why – because there could not be perfection by the Levitical priesthood. That is why Messiah came to offer Himself as the perfect sacrifice. Jesus is our perfect high priest – not after the order of Aaron but after the order of Melchisedec. And in order for Jesus to be a priest there was of necessity a change in the OT law – not some amendment but a complete and total change – why – because "Our Lord arose from Judah, of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood". Jesus could not be our high preist if the OT was still in force. That is why it was nailed to the cross with Him… "he canceled the bond which stood against us with its legal demands; this he set aside, nailing it to the cross" (Col. 2:14).
The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek. Psalms 110:4

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. Hebrews 7:11-14

Why am I not surprised that you ignored 98% of my post and extracted one short sentence, taking it out of context. I actually wholeheartedly agree with your post re the change to the law of Moses. The subject under discussion, and the one that always excites everyone's angst, is whether there was any change to the ten commandments. Because of , and only because of the Sabbath.Now read the rest of my post and and unravel the logic of my last paragraph, if you can.

losthorizon
Jun 28th 2008, 12:52 PM
Why am I not surprised that you ignored 98% of my post and extracted one short sentence, taking it out of context. I actually wholeheartedly agree with your post re the change to the law of Moses. The subject under discussion, and the one that always excites everyone's angst, is whether there was any change to the ten commandments. Because of , and only because of the Sabbath.Now read the rest of my post and and unravel the logic of my last paragraph, if you can.
I read all of you post, mate and it is only a rehashing of your same old argument that holds no water. There is nothing to “unravel” - it has been pointed out to you time and again - the Law of Moses included the 10 Commandment Law and the 10 Commandment Law is part and parcel to the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses - the bond which stood against us with its legal demands - was nailed (in its entirely) to the Cross. That law included the 4th Commandment and was given only to the Hebrew nation at Sinai. Christians today live under the New Covenant that includes the Law of Christ. The Law of Christ reiterates 9 of the 10 commands given to the Jews. The fourth commandment is conspicuously missing from the Law of Christ. There is no command or example in the NT where Christians are bound by Law to keep any day included the seventh day. There is no command or example of any of the Patriarchs or any Gentile ever being required to keep the Sabbath - it was given only to the Hebrew people - no one else. The day-keeping requirement was only given to those whom He “brought...out of the land of Egypt” and that doesn’t include you or me my friend. That law was annulled forever by His death on the cross…
Ex 20 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery…remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy."

Naphal
Jun 28th 2008, 07:52 PM
Actually, Jesus did not give anyone any new law. What He did, and what Isaiah prophecied He would do, was to put the magnifying glass to it and reveal it for what it truly was.

He did much more than that. He added new laws/commandments, expounded upon some old laws, and removed the rest.




The Pharisees thought they had it sussed. Because they didn't physically and personally kill anyone they considered themselves perfect when it came to the 4th commandment.


Yes that's true. They thought that way then and they still think that way today.




But Jesus told them that because they hated, they were as guilty of premeditated murder as anyone who had weilded the sword.
The same with adultery. But lust condemned them as much as the act.



Yep.


Jesus did not make the law harder, nor did He alter it, He very simply showed the true nature of it from of old.

In some ways he made it "easier" as you have just mentioned. Before, you were only guilty of murder or adultery of you committed the literal acts, but now just a thought could make you guilty. In other ways, he removed laws that people sometimes broke such as the laws about the Sabbath. Those are now gone so no one sins if they have a fire on a Saturday or go to work.




My whole theology on his matter is in the belief that because the law is a reflection of the character and righteousness of God, and because God does not change, therefore neither cannot the law change.(I speak of the ten commandments).

The ten are part of the law, not the law itself only. Not only did the law itself change, so didn't the part containing the ten commandments. Murder isn't solely killing someone, adultery isn't solely having carnal relations, the Sabbath is no longer a commandment. Those are huge changes!







Thus there is more than just one law. As I have contended from the beginning. And which you deny. But how you get around the above logic of my reasoning I am not sure.



It's faulty and incorrect therefore the entire premise fails. There is more than one law but the Sinai law isn't broken up into different laws. There is only the old Sinai law that is gone and the new law of the NT, the law of Christ.