To whom and why God gave the Sabbaths?

[ToBeLoved]

Was going to participate. Changed my mind. Bye all

 

[Cribstyl]

Now...I'm embarrassed

 

[tall73]

I agree Tall, all words have multiple meanings and those who insist on one meaning per word have what I call, NDD, or "Narrow Definition Disorder." I didn't have the time yesterday to go over every verse you shared, like with you I am sure, time is precious. Half of the verses you sent probably mean "brand new," your example above is one of them. However, there were a number of them that mean renewed.

So you first of all recognize then that "new" is within the range of meaning, whereas before you simply indicated the word was a cognate of the verb for renew. That is why usage is important to look at.

The new covenant IS one of them. This is not a brand new covenant, God made a covenant with Israel and called it Everlasting. That means it has no end and even if our theology cannot come up with an answer to reconcile "Everlasting covenant" with "

For you are not My people, And I will not be your God," that doesn't alter the fact that God used the word "everlasting" and we need to reconcile it, not ignore it.

I am NOT speaking about you, I do not know you, ok? But I see Christians, all the time, deliberately ignore certain passages and even get aggressive and/or divisive when confronted with verses they don't have an ability to answer for. I know Pastors that won't teach from James because they are so centered on grace alone they simply can't answer for "faith without works is dead being alone." Others will avoid certain places within Ezekiel because the idea of a Millennial Kingdom with a Temple and sacrifices goes against the notion that Yeshua was the final sacrifice. Even the Jews do this Tall, most Orthodox Synagogues do not read Isaiah 53. Easier to ignore it than deal with it.

I am not that way. I learned from a good teacher to just confront it and let the chips fall wherever God desires them to fall.

Adding something new to the covenant does not change the initial promise. You are Sophia's husband. If at your 20 year anniversary you buy her a new ring and stand before God and others and RENEW your vows.... to the point of not saying the same things you said before.... does that make the marriage covenant you made 20 years earlier null and void? Of course not.... now I can answer your points here, but will you fairly consider them? I have held your view for many years and have an answer now that covers more ground. Is it entirely without holes? Probably not... but it has less holes. I will play that off the next point as all these verses in Hebrews are joined anyway.

God made an everlasting covenant (Psalm 105:8-10) and it was renewed every time an Israelite brought a sacrifice. Most Christians don't understand that because they don't study the sacrificial system. Anyway.... God makes this everlasting covenant and Israel through Solomon, for the most part, are living a fairly godly existence. Part of the covenant, a commandment within the law states that the law was to be kept on the heart by the people. In other words, if you can place yourself back then for perspective, YOU were expected to keep the law on your heart at all times. But the people were not able to do this.


Now, as the reign of Solomon wore on, the tribes that made up the Northern Kingdom were falling further and further away from the Lord. Finally, after Solomon, they divided into two nations, Judah to the south (the Southern Kingdom) and Israel to the north (the Northern Kingdom). Before going on I need to ask if it has even occurred to you that the verses you are quoting from in Hebrews that are stated first in Jeremiah are speaking about the House of JUDAH and the House of ISRAEL? The verses in question are not dealing with gentiles (pagans, heathen)... but rather JUDAH and ISRAEL. You see, once the Kingdoms divided, Israel fell even further away and eventually, around 722BC, the Assyrians were allowed to come in and take Israel captive (prophesied first in Deut. 30:1-6, repeated in full in Hosea 1). Once there, they did not repent and call out to the Lord, instead, they assimilated into the Assyrian culture and accepted their many gods. So, God "gave them up" to their idols and eventually scattered them into the nations telling them, "For you are not My people, And I will not be your God." Now in the nations, without giving God thought at all, they lost their identity as Israel and became like everyone else. These people, historically became known as, "The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel." Knowing this Tall, is a paradigm changer when you consider Matthew 15:24. Anyway.... the MOST PROPHESIED EVENT in the bible is what? Messiah coming? Nope... it is Israel coming back out of the nations and becoming one with Judah again, never again to be divided... you can read the whole story by reading only Hosea 1. So Messiah comes on the scene and his mission is to call the Lost Sheep of Israel back into the fold. Not that salvation isn't for all, it is... but the weight of his mission was on the lost sheep, again, Matt. 15:24.

He does his work, he dies without sin, the grave is not designed for perfection and cannot hold him and he raises and in the process earns the right to do a number of things. Perfect us is one of them but HOW DOES HE PERFECT US? He will perfect us by writing the law on our minds and hearts. Where the PEOPLE WERE EXPECTED to keep the law on their hearts and they failed... God will do that work for us. He will circumcise the hearts (Deut. 30:1-6)... He will replace the heart of stone with a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 11:19). Notice these seemingly "NT" concepts were spoken of first in the OT.

The covenant ("I will be your God and you will be my people" as the promise from God's side) is NOT NEW, what is new is that the Law, rather than being written by man on stone (or paper) will be written by God directly where He commanded we keep it in the first place. Do you understand? What makes it better is that the text is moved to a place where we will become unable to sin because it will become PART OF US.... as if or even literally part of our DNA. And that process has even begun in us but won't be completed until Yeshua's return.

This is why Kainos (renew) rather than nehos (brand new) is used in the NT everywhere you see the word "new" and "covenant" together.... save for ONE place. And in that one place the context is dealing with writing the law on the heart rather than on stone (or paper). That part is new, that part is BETTER, but the covenant itself is renewed.

Yes, certainly they were to have circumcised hearts, etc. even in the Old Testament. However, they failed, and suffered the covenant curses again and again. God's new covenant is based on better promises because it is dependent only on His actions.

But after speaking about how you have to take on concepts head on, I don't feel you really took on the issues presented to you in Hebrews. Changing from a covenant with mutual promises to a unilateral covenant is more than just a new wrinkle. And you didn't address the very plain language of Hebrews...first...second. Are you going to address it?

An everlasting covenant was made with Abraham before Moses entered the picture. And an everlasting covenant was later made with David. Paul notes that the promise to Abraham was not dependent on the law, later given to Moses.

Gal 3:16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many, but referring to one, "And to your offspring," who is Christ.
Gal 3:17 This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.

God did not forsake His sinful people, even when they abandon Him and suffer the curses of the covenant. Instead, He gives better promises in a new covenant. And along with that we have a new and better High Priest over that covenant:


Jesus made a once-for-all sacrifice

Heb 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.

Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God

Jesus is not a priest after Levi but after the order of Melchizedek

Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.
Heb 7:15 This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek,
Heb 7:16 who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life.
Heb 7:17 For it is witnessed of him, "You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek."

Jesus does not have to offer for His own sin as He is sinless

Heb 7:26 For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.
Heb 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.

Heb 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

The earthly priest died, but Jesus always lives to make intercession for us

Heb 7:22 This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant.
Heb 7:23 The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office,
Heb 7:24 but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever.
Heb 7:25 Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.


Jesus opened (inaugurated) a new and living way for us that far surpasses even the once per year access of the old high priest

Heb 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus,
Heb 10:20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh



Richard Davidson, an Adventist scholar who has written on the typology of Hebrews, points out that the author is not just changing things with no warrant. He notes that the author makes careful arguments from the Old Testament scriptures to show that modifications to the type were anticipated by the Old Testament scriptures themselves.

For instance, in regard to Jesus being Priest after the order of Melchizedek rather than Levi, Davidson notes the author's explanation quotes from Psalm 110, where this new priesthood is anticipated:

Psa 110:4 The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, "You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.

Davidson's views are spelled out in the book Issues in the Book of Hebrews in the article "Relationship Between Type and Antitype in Hebrews".

But while these elements are anticipated by the OT Scriptures, these elements are certainly different than the original covenant agreement in Exodus 19, ratified in Exodus 24, etc.

These were not without warning in the OT, but they are not in fact the same as the old covenant, which is why Hebrews talks of a better covenant, better promises, a first and second, etc.

The old covenant led to curses and was the ministry of death, not by design, but because the people failed to live up to their promises. God made a new covenant that preserves the blessings under the old, and even adds to them, but puts all the responsibility of the promises on Him.

I don't think the recipients of this new covenant are going to complain about how the old deal that became a ministry of death was overshadowed.

 

[Bob S]

Bob, I decided not to spend much time on your other replies because you do misunderstood what I said, to try to unravel it is probably not something you want to sit through. So I decided to try one more time with this comment, something simple and small and if we have something of a discussion from it, great and if not we'll just part brothers. So... I have two points...

I am really disappointed that you didn't respond to my post #165. Of course you are not the first one to disregard New Testament scripture that refutes Messianic beliefs as well as those of SDAs and other Sabbath believers. I still believe you could be open to a real debate and maybe we could both learn more of how we can serve our Savior in a better way. In fact, I feel so strongly about my statements that I really want you to address them before I delve into your statements below. I am going to wait until you address the issues I brought up, but am also itching to answer your thoughts below. Sincerely, bob

1. Yeshua said, "I have not been sent BUT to the lost sheep of the Israel." He also said, "my sheep hear my voice." Now, you can in faith, you heard his voice, and he was only sent (by his OWN WORDS) to the lost sheep of ISRAEL. My question is, who do you think you are? A gentile? No... when the word "gentile" was first used in the English language as a translation for ethnos, the definition was, "a pagan, a heathen, anyone who is not a Jew OR a Christian." (Source - Webster's 1828) The MODERN definition of a gentile is, "any believer who is not Jewish." You are not a gentile, forcing the modern definition onto gentile and applying it to us takes away from the context of Scripture. Ethnos means nations, pagan, heathen, anyone who is not Israel. Messiah said he had not been sent BUT to the Lost Sheep of Israel... and you will not find the word "gentile" attached to the word covenant....i.e. "covenant with the gentiles." The covenant you quote above says, "House of Judah (the Jews) and the House of Israel." Southern Kingdom and Northern Kingdom....

And finally, the new Jerusalem... it has no gate of the gentiles. 12 gates, 12 tribes of Israel. Again, who do you think you are?

2. The word for "new" covenant does not mean new.

There are two words in Greek translated as new. The first is Kainos and the second is nehos. Here is the Strong's entry for Kainos:

G2537 -
kahee-nos'
Of uncertain affinity; new (especially in freshness; while G3501 is properly so with respect to age): - new.

So kainos is "new especially in freshness." G3501, nehos, is new in respect to AGE, i.e. brand new. The "new covenant" is kainos, new in freshness, renewed. Remember, God made an "everlasting covenant" (Psalm 105:8-10) and everlasting means everlasting. So it would make sense contextually, that this is that covenant renewed. But, we need a second witness, right? Well, Hebrews 8:8-11 is Jeremiah 31:31-34 being quoted word for word. The word for "new" in new covenant in Jeremiah is chadashah (H2319) which is the adjective form of the verb chadash (H2318) which means "to renew." If you don't believe me, look it up yourself.

What makes it better Bob? That should be the question! And the answer is... "that which was on stone is being moved to the heart." The mark of the "new covenant" is that the law is being written on the mind and heart. What law? The law that was on stone... the one Christians teach is done away with. This is why Ezekiel 11:19 said that God will replace the stony heart and replace with a heart of flesh. This is why Deut. 30:1-6 promises Israel being cut off, brought back in, and having their heart circumcised. Read it... Paul writes of the circumcision of the heart... this isn't a new thing, he is quoting Deut. 30.

We'll see where this goes. Blessings.

 

[Bob S]

The covenant with Israel was based on "IF" If you will I will. If Israel keeps the covenant I, God, will be their God and you will be my people.
Leviticus 26:12
And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people. Please read the entire 26th chapter of Leviticus.

"If" does not, in any way, mean everlasting. God would have made the covenant everlasting "if".

 

[bugkiller]

Well said Bob, he does not follow up to our rebuttals on his claims.

What did you expect?

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

Why do some Christians seem to LOOK for ways to divide with anyone who doesn't look, act and think like they do? I can't imagine this pleases the Lord! We should understand that until we are perfected, none should be expected to be perfect. I am sure I have error, I am sure you all do too. But we LOVE THE LORD, and if we are known by the fruits and the fruits of the Spirit are love, peace, joy, patience, long-suffering (etc.) then we should interact with those fruits evident. We shouldn't be name calling or degrading others because we have reached a different conclusion. We're on the same team, part of the same one body and if we are to love our neighbor as ourselves, even love our ENEMIES... then why do some many Christians treat each other with disdain? Pride because you are not agreed with? I profane the name of the Lord when we act in a manner inconsistent with His character.

The world is watching and our lives might be the only bible they read!

One of the problems I have here at CF is the personal attacks by the pro law people who always are degrading the pro grace people. But what can you expect from one who goes by the law, after all it is very condemning.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

So you first of all recognize then that "new" is within the range of meaning, whereas before you simply indicated the word was a cognate of the verb for renew. That is why usage is important to look at.




Yes, certainly they were to have circumcised hearts, etc. even in the Old Testament. However, they failed, and suffered the covenant curses again and again. God's new covenant is based on better promises because it is dependent only on His actions.

But after speaking about how you have to take on concepts head on, I don't feel you really took on the issues presented to you in Hebrews. Changing from a covenant with mutual promises to a unilateral covenant is more than just a new wrinkle. And you didn't address the very plain language of Hebrews...first...second. Are you going to address it?

An everlasting covenant was made with Abraham before Moses entered the picture. And an everlasting covenant was later made with David. Paul notes that the promise to Abraham was not dependent on the law, later given to Moses.

Gal 3:16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, "And to offsprings," referring to many, but referring to one, "And to your offspring," who is Christ.
Gal 3:17 This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void.

God did not forsake His sinful people, even when they abandon Him and suffer the curses of the covenant. Instead, He gives better promises in a new covenant. And along with that we have a new and better High Priest over that covenant:


Jesus made a once-for-all sacrifice

Heb 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.

Heb 10:11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God

Jesus is not a priest after Levi but after the order of Melchizedek

Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.
Heb 7:15 This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek,
Heb 7:16 who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life.
Heb 7:17 For it is witnessed of him, "You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek."

Jesus does not have to offer for His own sin as He is sinless

Heb 7:26 For it was indeed fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, unstained, separated from sinners, and exalted above the heavens.
Heb 7:27 He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself.

Heb 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

The earthly priest died, but Jesus always lives to make intercession for us

Heb 7:22 This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant.
Heb 7:23 The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office,
Heb 7:24 but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever.
Heb 7:25 Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.


Jesus opened (inaugurated) a new and living way for us that far surpasses even the once per year access of the old high priest

Heb 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus,
Heb 10:20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh



Richard Davidson, an Adventist scholar who has written on the typology of Hebrews, points out that the author is not just changing things with no warrant. He notes that the author makes careful arguments from the Old Testament scriptures to show that modifications to the type were anticipated by the Old Testament scriptures themselves.

For instance, in regard to Jesus being Priest after the order of Melchizedek rather than Levi, Davidson notes the author's explanation quotes from Psalm 110, where this new priesthood is anticipated:

Psa 110:4 The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind, "You are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.

Davidson's views are spelled out in the book Issues in the Book of Hebrews in the article "Relationship Between Type and Antitype in Hebrews".

But while these elements are anticipated by the OT Scriptures, these elements are certainly different than the original covenant agreement in Exodus 19, ratified in Exodus 24, etc.

These were not without warning in the OT, but they are not in fact the same as the old covenant, which is why Hebrews talks of a better covenant, better promises, a first and second, etc.

The old covenant led to curses and was the ministry of death, not by design, but because the people failed to live up to their promises. God made a new covenant that preserves the blessings under the old, and even adds to them, but puts all the responsibility of the promises on Him.

I don't think the recipients of this new covenant are going to complain about how the old deal that became a ministry of death was overshadowed.

To many choices in the bottom right corner. Wish I could use 3 or 4 of them. IOW excellent.

bugkiller

 

[Ken Rank]

Was going to participate. Changed my mind. Bye all

If I am in any way the cause, I apologize.

 

[Ken Rank]

Let it drop? You get your say and I don't have any chance for rebuttal?

No, me saying, "I will let this drop" does not mean I am the only one who gets a say. It means, "I am saying what I think and then I am letting it drop." Meaning... I will have said what I care to, if you want to say something about it, go ahead! Not sure why you had to go to a negative from me when we don't know each other. Why not assume I didn't mean it in an untoward way before assuming the worst?

You would really ask that? Jesus saves us from the second death. Jesus never ever has shielded mankind from temptation.

I said, "If Yeshua is your rest, then why are you still decaying, dying, exposed to sin, tempted?" And that stands... we ARE SAVED from any final death but the fact remains that the wages of sin is death. Adam wasn't born with a clock ticking toward his demise... the clock began to tick when he sinned. When we are born, the clock starts to tick and we are not at rest yet because we ARE STILL exposed to sin, tempted, we decay, age, and die. We won't taste the final death but we ARE still paying the price for sin. Forgiven? Sure... we have the promise of eternal life... but we are still paying the price because we STILL DIE.

maybe you should restudy your thoughts. When I accepted Jesus as my Savior I started my journey into everlasting life. Jude 1:
24 Now all glory to God, who is able to keep you from falling away and will bring you with great joy into his glorious presence without a single fault. 25 All glory to him who alone is God, our Savior through Jesus Christ our Lord. All glory, majesty, power, and authority are his before all time, and in the present, and beyond all time! Amen.

Sure, we all did.... but we are not perfected yet, not incorruptible, we WILL be changed when he returns. Until then... we are His, we are on a great journey, but by accepting Jesus (is there a verse that says to accept him or to confess he is Lord which means living according to His standards and not ours?) you still age, decay, and die.

I truly believe that Jesus at this moment is sustaining me and keeping me until that day when He calls us home.

Amen!

Paul said that the Spirit was given as "a down payment" (2 Cor. 1:22 and 5:5) and while he comforts, teaches, guides us... etc.... the fact remains that the Spirit was given a a down payment toward much more to come. What you have and what you are is not all you will be. There is much before us. Shalom!

 

[Ken Rank]

Exo 1:8 Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know Joseph.

Deu 22:8 "When you build a new house, you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring the guilt of blood upon your house, if anyone should fall from it.

Deu 24:5 When a man hath taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war, neither shall he be charged with any business: but he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken.

Deu 32:17 They sacrificed to demons that were no gods, to gods they had never known, to new gods that had come recently, whom your fathers had never dreaded.

Jdg 15:13 They said to him, "No; we will only bind you and give you into their hands. We will surely not kill you." So they bound him with two new ropes and brought him up from the rock.

Jdg 16:11 And he said to her, "If they bind me with new ropes that have not been used, then I shall become weak and be like any other man."

1Sa 6:7 Now then, take and prepare a new cart and two milk cows on which there has never come a yoke, and yoke the cows to the cart, but take their calves home, away from them.

Jer 31:22 How long will you waver, O faithless daughter? For the LORD has created a new thing on the earth: a woman encircles a man."

Usage shows the concept of new, rather than just renewed.

In some verses, not all. When the "new moon" comes and marks the beginning of the biblical month, is it a NEW moon or the same moon that was there last month that is renewing a repeating cycle? The covenant was called everlasting by God not by me. Therefore, the covenant IS in fact everlasting. If He makes a brand new one, He has trumped and/or dumped the one He said was forever? He isn't the author of confusion. If He calls it everlasting then it is... whether that stands in harmony with our current theology or not.

Since He called it everlasting, the context DEMANDS renew rather than brand new in this case.

 

[bbbbbbb]

In some verses, not all. When the "new moon" comes and marks the beginning of the biblical month, is it a NEW moon or the same moon that was there last month that is renewing arepeating cycle? The covenant was called everlasting by God not by me. Therefore, the covenant IS in fact everlasting. If He makes a brand new one, He has trumped and/or dumped the one He said was forever? He isn't the author of confusion. If He calls it everlasting then it is... whether that stands in harmony with our current theology or not.

Since He called it everlasting, the context DEMANDS renew rather than brand new in this case.

There is a parallel complexity with God's promise to King David that David's throne would last forever. We know that there were no kings in Israel or Judah after the Babylonian conquest. Did God fail in His eternal promise? To many Jews the answer is a very sad yes. Christians, however, understand the promise through the lens of the book of the Hebrews.

 

[Ken Rank]

There is a parallel complexity with God's promise to King David that David's throne would last forever. We know that there were no kings in Israel or Judah after the Babylonian conquest. Did God fail in His eternal promise? To many Jews the answer is a very sad yes. Christians, however, understand the promise through the lens of the book of the Hebrews.

Did God fail? Not at all. There has not been a king over a "united" Israel since Solomon and their won't be until Yeshua returns.

Hosea 1:11 Then the children of Judah and the children of Israel Shall be gathered together, And appoint for themselves one head; And they shall come up out of the land, For great will be the day of Jezreel!

You know as well as I do that the promises surrounding the throne of David are not literal in the sense that "David" himself will reign forever. We know, or should, that David is a picture of Messiah. In fact, since you brought the Jews up, one ancient teaching is that there would be TWO Messiahs... Mashiach ben Yosef (Messiah, son of Joseph) the suffering servant. And Mashiach ben David, the Conquering King. Many Jews didn't accept Yeshua as messiah because they expected the Conquering King to free them from Rome, but I digress.

The throne of David is where Yeshua will reign from, over a united Israel, forever. So nothing has changed in that area... a promise was given by God and the promise will be kept.

Blessings.
Ken

 

[bbbbbbb]

Did God fail? Not at all. There has not been a king over a "united" Israel since Solomon and their won't be until Yeshua returns.

Hosea 1:11 Then the children of Judah and the children of Israel Shall be gathered together, And appoint for themselves one head; And they shall come up out of the land, For great will be the day of Jezreel!

You know as well as I do that the promises surrounding the throne of David are not literal in the sense that "David" himself will reign forever. We know, or should, that David is a picture of Messiah. In fact, since you brought the Jews up, one ancient teaching is that there would be TWO Messiahs... Mashiach ben Yosef (Messiah, son of Joseph) the suffering servant. And Mashiach ben David, the Conquering King. Many Jews didn't accept Yeshua as messiah because they expected the Conquering King to free them from Rome, but I digress.

The throne of David is where Yeshua will reign from, over a united Israel, forever. So nothing has changed in that area... a promise was given by God and the promise will be kept.

Blessings.
Ken

Absolutely! God promises never fail.

 

[bugkiller]

No, me saying, "I will let this drop" does not mean I am the only one who gets a say. It means, "I am saying what I think and then I am letting it drop." Meaning... I will have said what I care to, if you want to say something about it, go ahead! Not sure why you had to go to a negative from me when we don't know each other. Why not assume I didn't mean it in an untoward way before assuming the worst?



I said, "If Yeshua is your rest, then why are you still decaying, dying, exposed to sin, tempted?" And that stands... we ARE SAVED from any final death but the fact remains that the wages of sin is death. Adam wasn't born with a clock ticking toward his demise... the clock began to tick when he sinned. When we are born, the clock starts to tick and we are not at rest yet because we ARE STILL exposed to sin, tempted, we decay, age, and die. We won't taste the final death but we ARE still paying the price for sin. Forgiven? Sure... we have the promise of eternal life... but we are still paying the price because we STILL DIE.



Sure, we all did.... but we are not perfected yet, not incorruptible, we WILL be changed when he returns. Until then... we are His, we are on a great journey, but by accepting Jesus (is there a verse that says to accept him or to confess he is Lord which means living according to His standards and not ours?) you still age, decay, and die.



Paul said that the Spirit was given as "a down payment" (2 Cor. 1:22 and 5:5) and while he comforts, teaches, guides us... etc.... the fact remains that the Spirit was given a a down payment toward much more to come. What you have and what you are is not all you will be. There is much before us. Shalom!

The promise f the law is only about the body of the flesh. This can be seen in Deuteronomy. The NC is about the soul.

bugkiller

 

[bugkiller]

In some verses, not all. When the "new moon" comes and marks the beginning of the biblical month, is it a NEW moon or the same moon that was there last month that is renewing a repeating cycle? The covenant was called everlasting by God not by me. Therefore, the covenant IS in fact everlasting. If He makes a brand new one, He has trumped and/or dumped the one He said was forever? He isn't the author of confusion. If He calls it everlasting then it is... whether that stands in harmony with our current theology or not.

Since He called it everlasting, the context DEMANDS renew rather than brand new in this case.

You are not reading what is being posted directly to you.

bugkiller

 

[Cribstyl]

Nehemiah gives us a timeline of actions that God had undertaken, beginning from creation. It includes: The covenant with Abraham, the afflictions in Egypt, the plagues and overthrow of Pharoah, Manna, Giving of the law, and especially when the Sabbath was first know by the Children of Israel. These historical issues can be proven with Genesis and Exodus. It's also what Jews today claim as truth. (claiming a creation Sabbath contradicts scriptures.)

Neh 9:6 Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.
Neh 9:7 Thou art the LORD the God, who didst choose Abram, and broughtest him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of Abraham;
Neh 9:8 And foundest his heart faithful before thee, and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Jebusites, and the Girgashites, to give it, I say, to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou art righteous:
Neh 9:9 And didst see the affliction of our fathers in Egypt, and heardest their cry by the Red sea;
Neh 9:10 And shewedst signs and wonders upon Pharaoh, and on all his servants, and on all the people of his land: for thou knewest that they dealt proudly against them. So didst thou get thee a name, as it is this day.
Neh 9:11 And thou didst divide the sea before them, so that they went through the midst of the sea on the dry land; and their persecutors thou threwest into the deeps, as a stone into the mighty waters.
Neh 9:12 Moreover thou leddest them in the day by a cloudy pillar; and in the night by a pillar of fire, to give them light in the way wherein they should go.
Neh 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:
Neh 9:14 And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant:
Neh 9:15 And gavest them bread from heaven for their hunger, and broughtest forth water for them out of the rock for their thirst, and promisedst them that they should go in to possess the land which thou hadst sworn to give them.

 

[pat34lee]

Would you please show us where any convert to Christianity in the book of Acts joined Israel.

Eph 2 tells us we are fellow citizens with the saints. Abraham is considered a saint. Abraham was never a part of Israel. Israelites are not.Why do you not accept Genesis, Jeremiah, the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles? You and John are talking about different sets of commands and covenants.

John, like anyone mentioning scripture or God's commands meant Torah and the prophets.
The same ones we should be studying to show ourselves approved.

Abram was a father of Israel. So was Adam, Seth, Noah and so on. Straight line relationships.
God has always dealt with only one family group, and all covenants are with that bloodline.

I have an article for you to read. See if it answers your questions. And consider the answers
before trying to discount it.
http://www.askelm.com/essentials/ess009.htm

 

[pat34lee]

Please identify the Root. No where in Scripture is Israel identified as the/a root. It is also interesting Israel must also be graft into the Root. This means they are not part of the Root prior. Yes all your works are unprofitable. The wages of those works are death while the gift of God is life. Rom 6:23 The passage is not making reference to the temporal. What is this price as if I did not know? If one is bought can they become owned property by some other means?The NC covenant is much easier and besides everyone but Israel is still under the covenant issued to Noah in this respect.

bugkiller

God is the root or the life source, Jesus is the stem (the only connection to God), Israel
and later, us, are the branches. Why did some of the natural branches have to be cut
out for us to be grafted in? And when will they be regrafted?

Please read my previous post to this one too.

 

[bugkiller]

John, like anyone mentioning scripture or God's commands meant Torah and the prophets.
The same ones we should be studying to show ourselves approved.

Abram was a father of Israel. So was Adam, Seth, Noah and so on. Straight line relationships.
God has always dealt with only one family group, and all covenants are with that bloodline.

I have an article for you to read. See if it answers your questions. And consider the answers
before trying to discount it.
http://www.askelm.com/essentials/ess009.htm

No because of JN 1:17 and 15:10.

bugkiller