The End of Days

[SabbathBlessings]

The new covenant did not begin until after Jesus' death.

Yes, This was after the death of Jesus after His blood ratified the covenant. It Is Finished, nothing could be changed to His covenant. Which is why decades later the Sabbath is still the Sabbath day Acts 16:13 Acts 18:4 Acts 13:42-44 in NT teachings.

 

[Clare73]

Yes, This was after the death of Jesus. It Is Finished, nothing could be changed to His covenant. Which is why decades later the Sabbath is still a day Acts 16:3 Acts 18:4 Acts 13:42-44 in NT teachings.

They could not know from Jesus before his resurrection of the beginning of the new covenant.

In the new covenant, he who loves God and neighbor as self has fulfilled the law (Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40).

 

[SabbathBlessings]

They could not know of its beginning until Jesus' resurrection.

In the new covenant, he who loves God and neighbor as self has fulfilled the law (Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40).

No, Jesus taught what the New Covenant was about before He died as He is our example to follow 1 John 2:6 and after He rose, not once mentioned any change to any of His holy commandments. He did not leave it up to us to add what we want to it. Jesus made that clear, which is why every Sabbath was kept decades after His cross by His apostles.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go [c]therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” [d]Amen.

Yes, love fulfills the law and love does not delete those details Romans 13:9 1 John 5:2-3 You cannot love God by breaking His commandments and being in rebellion to Him, that shows a lack of faith and unbelief.

 

[Clare73]

No, Jesus taught what the New Covenant was about

I believe Ro 13:8-9, Mt 22:37-40.

He who loves has fulfilled the law.
"Whatever commandment there may" be is summed up in one rule: love of God and neighbor as self (Ro 13:8-9, Mt 22:37-40).

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I believe Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40.

Sorry that you don't.

I believe it too; I just do not believe that the summary deletes the details. For example, like we can worship others gods and still fulfill love to God or steal from our neighbor and this fulfill love to our neighbor etc. etc. etc. hence 1 John 5:2-3 but I am happy to agree to disagree and all gets sorted out soon enough.

 

[Clare73]

I believe it too; I just do not believe that the summary deletes the details. For example, like we can worship others gods and still fulfill love to God

Not the God I worship!

That explains a lot. . .yours is a sub-Christian notion of love of God.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Not the God I worship!

So those details aren't deleted. 1 John 5:2-3 That I will agree with

 

[daq]

I believe Ro 13:8-9, Mt 22:37-40.

He who loves has fulfilled the law.
"Whatever commandment there may" be is summed up in one rule: love of God and neighbor as self (Ro 13:8-9, Mt 22:37-40).

Love apart from the teachings provided in scripture is way too subjective, (it can and does mean different things to different people, as in the idiom, it's in the eye of the beholder). The scripture teaches us what things are pleasing to our Elohim so that we may show our love by choosing those things that please Him.

Example:

Isaiah 56:3-7 KJV
3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the LORD, speak, saying, The LORD hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree.
4 For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;
5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.
6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant;
7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

 

[daq]

In the new covenant, he who loves God and neighbor as self has fulfilled the law (Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40).

That explains a lot. . .yours is a sub-Christian notion of love of God.

???

 

[Clare73]

Love apart from the teachings provided in scripture is way too subjective,

None of which negates Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40.

 

[trophy33]

And context was demonstrated but we are all free to our own opinions

For example, your frequently used "the sabbath was made for man, not man for sabbath, therefore the Son of man is lord of the sabbath".

- the context is not some kind of universality of the commandment for all Gentiles, but the question of pharisees "why do your disciples break the sabbath?"

You simply take the dictionary meaning you like and ascribe a totally foreign context to it. This does not work.

 

[trophy33]

and Truth gets sorted out soon enough.

If you are implying some SDA's "the world will end soon" scenario, then no, it will not happen, again. As it did not happen in the 19th century.

Great Disappointment - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[daq]

None of which negates Ro 13:8, Mt 22:37-40.

In so many legalistic arguments you've turned the tables just like a lawyer.
Neither do any of your proof texts negate any part of the Torah.

 

[trophy33]

Neither do any of your proof texts negate any part of the Torah.

Are these enough? Though not sure what you mean by "negating", the specific purpose of Torah was fulfilled and is not for today.

It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Mt 5:31

You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person.
Mt 5:38

You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven
Mt 5:45

"For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John."
Mt 11:13

"For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands (ἐντολῶν) and regulations (δόγμασιν)."
Eph 2:15

"Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law...
So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."
Gal 3:23-25

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
Gal 5:1

"But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way
of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."
R 7:6

"So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another"
R 7:4

Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory...
For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.
2 Cor 3:7,11

 

[daq]

Are these enough? Though not sure what you mean by "negating", the specific purpose of Torah was fulfilled and is not for today.

No, the Torah was filled to the full, (pleroo), and that is precisely what the Master then proceeds to do in the passage: fill up the true meanings, understanding, and interpretations of those things which follow in the passage. One may see that it is about interpretation and not about overthrowing anything in the Torah, and this may be seen even in the things which you have quoted because the statements commence with "You have heard that it was said by those of old time", or "It has been said", just as in your quotes. It is not about the Torah being wrong but about some of the faulty interpretations of the Elders, Pharisees, Scribes, and rulers of the people, etc., etc. Your own quotes from the passage prove that to be true.

It has been said, ‘Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Mt 5:31

You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person.
Mt 5:38

You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven
Mt 5:45

Yep, he is filling up the Torah and making it honorable with the true understandings and interpretations: and just because he makes known that an eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, was misapplied by those of old time does not mean that commandment is now done away with: it is simply not expounded here because it will be expounded elsewhere in his Testimony. If you truly desire to understand that one you will need to rightly divide between physical things and spiritual things. Love your enemy is speaking of the physical, literal physical people, for we are to love our neighbor as ourselves, but nowhere are we commanded to love Satan and his angels: that enemy is spiritual. Thus they had misapplied the commandment in this case.

"For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John."
Mt 11:13

That doesn't say it was therefore abolished: what it means is that the Torah was not even fully operational until Meshiah came and expounded it according to the true understandings and interpretations as you have shown in your quotes from Matthew 5 above.

Moreover you and I already had a lengthy discussion on this here:

The Sabbath is the 'Lords Day', not Sunday.

Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. NIV Πρὸ τοῦ...

www.christianforums.com

See also this thread:

Commencement of the Renewal of the Covenant

Exodus 23:20-23 OG LXX [20] και ιδου εγω αποστελλω τον αγγελον μου προ προσωπου σου ινα φυλαξη σε εν τη οδω οπως εισαγαγη σε εις την γην ην ητοιμασα σοι [21] προσεχε σεαυτω και εισακουε αυτου και μη απειθει αυτω ου γαρ μη υποστειληται σε το γαρ ονομα μου εστιν επ αυτω [22a] εαν ακοη ακουσητε της...

www.christianforums.com

"For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands (ἐντολῶν) and regulations (δόγμασιν)."
Eph 2:15

Yep, one new man, as hinted at in reply #8.

"Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law...
So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."
Gal 3:23-25

We've been over this too: get a better translation or learn Greek.

It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
Gal 5:1

"But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way
of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."
R 7:6

"So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another"
R 7:4

The typical way to make up ones own new gospel is to quote-mine for single text statements, strip them of their contexts and logos-reasoning, and paste them into walls of scripture. It is meaningless to do such a thing and it takes way more effort to refute such error than it does for the copy-and-paster to post the wall of error. Every point must be individually addressed according to its context: if you are not going to do that in your scripture walls, which would not likely even be possible in some cases because of the word count limit on the boards here, which is huge, (18,000, I think), then I have no compulsion to take it all apart and try to explain it, especially seeing that there is already so much we have discussed previously which you apparently entirely ignored.

Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory...
For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.
2 Cor 3:7,11

The Administering (Ministration) of Condemnation

There are many topics of discussion which may branch off from this passage. This thread will be an attempt to address and discuss several of the most important, which are multiple, but not necessarily every facet of every branch of every possible discussion. Suffice to say, at this point based...

www.christianforums.com

 

[trophy33]

No, the Torah was filled to the full, (pleroo), and that is precisely what the Master then proceeds to do in the passage: fill up the true meanings, understanding, and interpretations of those things which follow in the passage. One may see that it is about interpretation and not about overthrowing anything in the Torah, and this may be seen even in the things which you have quoted because the statements commence with "You have heard that it was said by those of old time", or "It has been said", just as in your quotes. It is not about the Torah being wrong but about some of the faulty interpretations of the Elders, Pharisees, Scribes, and rulers of the people, etc., etc. Your own quotes from the passage prove that to be true.



Yep, he is filling up the Torah and making it honorable with the true understandings and interpretations: and just because he makes known that an eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, was misapplied by those of old time does not mean that commandment is now done away with: it is simply not expounded here because it will be expounded elsewhere in his Testimony. If you truly desire to understand that one you will need to rightly divide between physical things and spiritual things. Love your enemy is speaking of the physical, literal physical people, for we are to love our neighbor as ourselves, but nowhere are we commanded to love Satan and his angels: that enemy is spiritual. Thus they had misapplied the commandment in this case.



That doesn't say it was therefore abolished: what it means is that the Torah was not even fully operational until Meshiah came and expounded it according to the true understandings and interpretations as you have shown in your quotes from Matthew 5 above.

Moreover you and I already had a lengthy discussion on this here:

The Sabbath is the 'Lords Day', not Sunday.

Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian. NIV Πρὸ τοῦ...

www.christianforums.com

See also this thread:

Commencement of the Renewal of the Covenant

Exodus 23:20-23 OG LXX [20] και ιδου εγω αποστελλω τον αγγελον μου προ προσωπου σου ινα φυλαξη σε εν τη οδω οπως εισαγαγη σε εις την γην ην ητοιμασα σοι [21] προσεχε σεαυτω και εισακουε αυτου και μη απειθει αυτω ου γαρ μη υποστειληται σε το γαρ ονομα μου εστιν επ αυτω [22a] εαν ακοη ακουσητε της...

www.christianforums.com

Yep, one new man, as hinted at in reply #8.



We've been over this too: get a better translation or learn Greek.



The typical way to make up ones own new gospel is to quote-mine for single text statements, strip them of their contexts and logos-reasoning, and paste them into walls of scripture. It is meaningless to do such a thing and it takes way more effort to refute such error than it does for the copy-and-paster to post the wall of error. Every point must be individually addressed according to its context: if you are not going to do that in your scripture walls, which would not likely even be possible in some cases because of the word count limit on the boards here, which is huge, (18,000, I think), then I have no compulsion to take it all apart and try to explain it, especially seeing that there is already so much we have discussed previously which you apparently entirely ignored.

The Administering (Ministration) of Condemnation

There are many topics of discussion which may branch off from this passage. This thread will be an attempt to address and discuss several of the most important, which are multiple, but not necessarily every facet of every branch of every possible discussion. Suffice to say, at this point based...

www.christianforums.com

OK, too many opinions to react to without exhaustion.

However, I think that the core of your thinking is this:
"That doesn't say it was therefore abolished: what it means is that the Torah was not even fully operational until Meshiah came and expounded it according to the true understandings"

1. You think that if Torah was fulfilled, its abolishing - no, it is not. Even though Torah has ended, it was not because of being violently destroyed or something like that. It simply grew old, obsolete. Its not in effect for the new creation.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
Mt 5:17

2. You think that Torah was not fully operational until Messiah - it was, it was actually its purpose, to be given until Messiah

So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Gal 3:23

3. You think that Christianity is some kind of "true understanding of Torah" - its not, Christianity is much more than that

"But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way
of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."
R 7:6

 

[daq]

The new covenant did not begin until after Jesus' death.

In order to partake in this covenant one must either be of the olive tree of the all Yisrael of the Father or be grafted into it because this covenant is cut with the house of Yisrael and the house of Yhudah.

Hebrews 8:8 KJV
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:

There is nothing in Hebrews 8 about Gentiles getting to remain as Gentiles forever.

Jeremiah 31:29-31 KJV
29 In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge.
30 But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.
31 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:

And the two houses comprise the olive tree of the all Yisrael of the Father.

Jeremiah 11:16-17 KJV
16 The LORD called thy name, A green olive tree, fair, and of goodly fruit: with the noise of a great tumult he hath kindled fire upon it, and the branches of it are broken.
17 For the LORD of hosts, that planted thee, hath pronounced evil against thee, for the evil of the house of Israel and of the house of Judah, which they have done against themselves to provoke me to anger in offering incense unto Baal.

And the Shabbat is an eternal sign between the Creator and His people Yisrael.

Exodus 31:12-18 KJV
12 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you.
14 Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.
15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.
17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

The one who says "Show me in the New Testament where I am commanded to observe the Sabbath" is the real legalist, arguing from silence within a legalistic framework, while ignoring love for the Father and seeking to do what is pleasing to Him, all because of a self-serving legalist understanding of the scripture wherein the silence of the letter gets them off the hook in their own way of reasoning. It isn't about being on or off the hook in regards to keeping a commandment: it is about showing your love for the Father and His Logos-Word who is His Son.

 

[daq]

1. You think that if Torah was fulfilled, its abolishing - no, it is not.

Many of those who hold your position teach this very thing about this passage.
Am I not to believe them when they say that is what they believe?

Pleroo: to cram to the full, to fill up, check the lexicons, otherwise we must agree to disagree.

Even though Torah has ended, it was not because of being violently destroyed or something like that. It simply grew old, obsolete. Its not in effect for the new creation.

According to the Master this is how one may enter into the new creation:

Mark 9:43-49 KJV
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Isa 66:24]
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Isa 66:24]
47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Isa 66:24]
49 For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. [Lev 2:13]

This has been explained from the Testimony before on multiple occasions, but for some reason no one ever seems to want to believe it. The problem for the non-believers is that they are not willing to understand and do what he says and are not willing to believe that the passages which he quotes still have any relevance because their pastors, preachers, and priests have taught them that they are now void. He quotes from both Isaiah 66:24 and from Leviticus 2:13, yes, Leviticus, the so-called "ceremonial law". Moreover, in addition to these difficulties, not many ever study the Septuagint. In the Septuagint the Isaiah passage is not dead bodies but rather limbs of the body, as if lopped or chopped off, just as the context within the Mark passage above is speaking about.

Isaiah 66:24 OG LXX
24 και εξελευσονται και οψονται τα κωλα [G2966 κωλον] των ανθρωπων των παραβεβηκοτων εν εμοι ο γαρ σκωληξ αυτων ου τελευτησει και το πυρ αυτων ου σβεσθησεται και εσονται εις ορασιν παση σαρκι

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments
G2966 κῶλον kolon (kō'-lon) n.
a limb of the body (as if lopped).
[from the base of G2849]
KJV: carcase
Root(s): G2849

Carcases or carcasses is a little misleading in modern English: it's body parts or limbs of the body, as if having been chopped off, and this is exactly the context in which the Master himself uses and expounds the passage.

And what does Leviticus 2:13 say? The statement from Mark 9:49, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt, is only commanded in Lev 2:13, and nowhere else in the Torah: so the Master is teaching about salting your sacrifices from the so-called "ceremonial law".

Moreover we know from his own Testimony, (if one truly believes his words, and I surely do), that the heavens and the earth shall pass away, but his words shall not pass away, Mat 24:35, Mrk 13:31, Luk 21:33. Therefore Leviticus 2:13, now having been fully expounded by the Master in his Testimony, is fully operational and relevant because it is not talking about slaughtering literal-physical animals, draining their blood, butchering their dead carcasses, and cooking their flesh to the satisfaction of the belly.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."
Mt 5:17

2. You think that Torah was not fully operational until Messiah - it was, it was actually its purpose, to be given until Messiah

See comments above.

So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Gal 3:23

Again, we've already been over this: get a better translation or learn Greek.

3. You think that Christianity is some kind of "true understanding of Torah" - its not, Christianity is much more than that

???

"But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way
of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."
R 7:6

I do not believe you understand that passage or the statement which you have removed from that passage and quoted here: I also surely have a difficult time believing you were ever bound by the Torah, or that you somehow died to it. If you have never served according to "the old way" then you really have no way of knowing what "the new way" actually entails, and the typical way for the mainstream preachers is to make up a nice sounding new way after doing some scripture quote-mining and proclaim that to be "of the Spirit", and with that the delusion is complete.

 

[daq]

So the law was our guardian until Christ came...
Gal 3:23

Moreover:

The Sabbath is the 'Lords Day', not Sunday.

The Sabbath rest was made holy because it prefigured our Sabbath rest in Christ. Not according to the Sabbath commandment where we find it to be a "memorial" not a prediction. It was given in Eden as a memorial of creation week according to the actual commandment Gen 2:1-3, Ex 20:8-11. No text...

www.christianforums.com

Aside from the fact that we did already discuss this, (and that the answer has not changed since then), even if your reading was correct, (which it is not), you still would not have justification for including yourself in the statement which you quote. Who says Paul is referring to the reader in that passage when he uses "we" and "our"? You wish to believe that: but are you indeed justified in assuming that much?

This epistle is not just from Paul alone:

Galatians 1:1-2 ASV
1 Paul, an apostle (not from men, neither through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead),
2 and all the brethren that are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:

That is why Gal 4:1-2, which Paul says in conclusion of the passage in question, is so important and cannot be ignored. Moreover the author of Hebrews makes this point even more clear in the following passage.

Hebrews 10:35-39 ASV
35 Cast not away therefore your boldness, which hath great recompense of reward.
36 For ye have need of patience, that, having done the will of God, ye may receive the promise.
37 For yet a very little while, He that cometh shall come, and shall not tarry. [Hab 2:3 LXX]
38 But my righteous one shall live by faith: And if he shrink back, my soul hath no pleasure in him. [Hab 2:4 LXX]
39 But we are not of them that shrink back unto perdition; but of them that have faith unto the saving of the soul.

So the author of Hebrews agrees with Paul in Galatians 3 and 4:1-2, just as explained to you in the previous thread, that unless and until one has done the will of Elohim, and has been fully tried, tested, and found true, then the same is yet still a babe or child, and is under tutors, governors, and a schoolmaster, until the time appointed of the Father, (when a child becomes a son, Gal 4:1-2). And, again, no father puts his untested and inexperienced child in charge of all his goods.

 

[trophy33]

Many of those who hold your position teach this very thing about this passage.
Am I not to believe them when they say that is what they believe?

Pleroo: to cram to the full, to fill up, check the lexicons, otherwise we must agree to disagree.

Nothing substantial here to react to.

According to the Master this is how one may enter into the new creation:

Mark 9:43-49 KJV
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Isa 66:24]
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Isa 66:24]
47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Isa 66:24]
49 For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. [Lev 2:13]

I see nothing in this quote to prove your position or to disprove mine.

This has been explained from the Testimony before on multiple occasions, but for some reason no one ever seems to want to believe it. The problem for the non-believers is that they are not willing to understand and do what he says and are not willing to believe that the passages which he quotes still have any relevance because their pastors, preachers, and priests have taught them that they are now void. He quotes from both Isaiah 66:24 and from Leviticus 2:13, yes, Leviticus, the so-called "ceremonial law". Moreover, in addition to these difficulties, not many ever study the Septuagint. In the Septuagint the Isaiah passage is not dead bodies but rather limbs of the body, as if lopped or chopped off, just as the context within the Mark passage above is speaking about.

Isaiah 66:24 OG LXX
24 και εξελευσονται και οψονται τα κωλα [G2966 κωλον] των ανθρωπων των παραβεβηκοτων εν εμοι ο γαρ σκωληξ αυτων ου τελευτησει και το πυρ αυτων ου σβεσθησεται και εσονται εις ορασιν παση σαρκι

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments
G2966 κῶλον kolon (kō'-lon) n.
a limb of the body (as if lopped).
[from the base of G2849]
KJV: carcase
Root(s): G2849

Carcases or carcasses is a little misleading in modern English: it's body parts or limbs of the body, as if having been chopped off, and this is exactly the context in which the Master himself uses and expounds the passage.

And what does Leviticus 2:13 say? The statement from Mark 9:49, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt, is only commanded in Lev 2:13, and nowhere else in the Torah: so the Master is teaching about salting your sacrifices from the so-called "ceremonial law".

Moreover we know from his own Testimony, (if one truly believes his words, and I surely do), that the heavens and the earth shall pass away, but his words shall not pass away, Mat 24:35, Mrk 13:31, Luk 21:33. Therefore Leviticus 2:13, now having been fully expounded by the Master in his Testimony, is fully operational and relevant because it is not talking about slaughtering literal-physical animals, draining their blood, butchering their dead carcasses, and cooking their flesh to the satisfaction of the belly.

A lot of opinions.

Again, we've already been over this: get a better translation or learn Greek.

Another opinion.

I do not believe you understand that passage or the statement which you have removed from that passage and quoted here

Another opinion.

I also surely have a difficult time believing you were ever bound by the Torah, or that you somehow died to it.

Paul frequently uses generalization when talking to churches composed of both Jews and Gentiles.

the typical way for the mainstream preachers is to make up a nice sounding new way after doing some scripture quote-mining and proclaim that to be "of the Spirit", and with that the delusion is complete.

Another opinion.