Jer 31:31-34

[DamianWarS]

Christ's Law is God's. There is no difference.

A Typo is highlighted in red below in the original quote. Sorry for the confusion.

It should read, James mentions laws which are mentioned thoughout the Book of the Law. The royal Law of Love. The law pertaining TO respect to persons and the Ten. All of which He connects to the perfect Law, that of Liberty which is called such because it is engrafted into us because we are begotten by the Word of truth and are a new creation. So let's not forget what manner of man we are and be a doer of the word that is engrafted and not a forgetful hearer. For we will be judged by that which is engrafted, the perfect Law that of Liberty, freedom.

there is no difference, yet the term needs to be qualified critically and not just conflated. it is clear for Abraham and Moses that circumcision in the flesh was God's law. in the flesh is explicit in the Abrahamic covenant in Gen 17 and Moses was almost killed for not performing it. Yet new covenant understanding does value circumcision in the flesh and it's deeper meaning of identifying with the fullness of Christ has been revealed. So Christ's law/God's law does mean spiritual circumcision but it does not mean circumcision of the flesh, even though it did mean that for Moses and Abraham.

Since circumcision is clearly established in these ways through the new covenant that same measure can be applied to all of Torah with a value of seeking it "in the heart" with the understanding that the outward product may be effected as well. The 10 say not to steal, lie, murder, etc... the sum of which is a person who does not steal, lie, murder, etc... however the Christ's law, the law of love, the golden law as James defines it is more than the sum total of the moral aspects of the 10. I may not murder my neighbour, steal from him, lie to him, covet his belongings or sleep with his wife yet harbour hate in my heart for him. The former is the sum of lawful actions according to the 10, the latter breaks them all making those supposed lawful actions void. So Christ's law is greater than the sum total of the 10 itself, thus it cannot be a product of the 10 or merely a summary of it.

The royal law is not pertaining to respect to persons and the ten... I don't know where you got this idea to throw on "and the 10" at the end. Not a single scripture uses that language, all you are doing is conflating terms. the royal law acts as a construct of Torah as it is the basis or lens of all law. it is not a summary or law expounded, it operates at a higher level. Christ says it is lawful to do good on the sabbath (mat 12:12) does that not beg the question why not just "do good" then all our actions are lawful? This is Christ applying his royal law over the sabbath, and this royal law may be applied over all torah the same way essentially meaning it is lawful to do the royal law over x action of the Torah no matter what that law is.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

there is a lot of Mat 5 passages in here and for good reason. But its curious you see Jesus quoting these passages as "change" but the same passage in Mat 5 where he quotes and offers alternatives to parts of the 10 commandments you see as "magnify". Do you not see how biased this looks? Jesus is not quoting parts of the 10 to magnify the. He even introduces them in a way that undermines their value, not even calling them law of God's commandments but rather "You have heard that it was said to the people long ago..." In this way he casts doubt on them so that he can offer something better. His quotes expose their limits, then he offers a better way of approaching the root of the matter which is of the heart. I actually don't see how you can read this and interpret this as Christ valuing the 10 but instead quite the opposite, he shuts down the 10 and shows a better way.

Damian I disagree . Jesus the son of God is one with God and does not change, @Soyeong rightfully reminded me of that. I was not convinced by what I wrote. Simply because Jesus said;"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Mat 5:18.
The 10 Commandments are the core of the Law. Love is at the core of it all, we exist because of it, without love, all is lost.

Damian do you follow the Jesus of islam Isa Al Masih? what is your religion exactly so i can understand you better?

 

[HIM]

If you find the verse that says the book of the law is the Royal law, please share.

Once again we never said it was. Insults? Where? You say that because I don’t think you are reading and or understanding what was posted to you? What else are we suppose think when you keep implying that we said the royal law is the book of the law when we haven’t.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Not does, is. If one is looking into a mirror they see who they are from the reflection. The reflection you and I see is one begotten by the word of truth. One begotten by the word of truth has the word engrafted in them. It is who we are now being a first fruit, a new creature as verses 18 and 21 say. But we must be doers of this word we received and not hearers only deceiving, misleading ourselves as verse 22 states. Ourselves being this new creature begotten by the Word of truth receiving the engrafted word vs18. This is what we now see in the mirror. It is our reflection. And as one who sees this reflection don't forget what we are now. Begotten by the Word of Truth and receiving the engrafted Word.
Verse 25 is being said in contrast to the reflection one sees and not forgetting what manner of man we are. So be a doer of the work of being begotten by the word of truth, receiving the engrafted word and not a hearer only misleading, deluding ourselves. What we see in the mirror now through Christ is the new creature. This new creature, you and I is the law perfect, that of freedom. Kind begets kind. So If we our begotten by the Word of truth we are kindred to it, the first fruit of His creatures. Behold Old things have passed away. All things are new and of God.


Jas 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.
Jas 1:19 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath:
Jas 1:20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.
Jas 1:21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.
Jas 1:22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
Jas 1:23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
Jas 1:24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
Jas 1:25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.



That is not the context of the passage

I think you are underestimating the Ten Commandments and its purpose. James didn't which is why he told us what it means and what they are and we will be judged by them which correlates with the rest of the scriptures as shown previously.

From which law is being quoted and contrasted? I truly believe if we allow the scripture to explain itself plainly, it reveals God's will for mankind.

James 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty.

How do we know we are sinning, the law shows us Rom 7:7 Rom 3:20 Which is why the law of Liberty, Ten Commandments is like a mirror it shows us our sins and unrighteousness, the natural man Psa 119:172 and our need for a Savior. God's perfect law converting the soul Psa 19:7 written by God Himself. Exo 32:16 Exo 31:18

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Once again we never said it was. Insults? Where? You say that because I don’t think you are reading and or understanding what was posted to you? What else are we suppose think when you keep implying that we said the royal law is the book of the law when we haven’t.

Ok, maybe I read that one sentence wrong, I just looked, my apologies about that if I misunderstood you.

I agree that that greatest commandment to love thy neighbor is written In the book of the law, but it doesn't make the Royal Law the Book of the law. The greatest commandments or Royal Law is the Ten Commandments summarized Rom 13:9 expressed how we are to love God and love man 1 John 5:2-3 the way Jesus explained Isa 42:21 Mat 5:19-30, not breaking the letter, but kept by the spirit of the law which is greater and gets right to the heart of the matter. Heb 8:10 Psa 40:8 where sin begins.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I asked if Ellen writes on the Law of Liberty.

I answered this in the post you replied to.

 

[DamianWarS]

Damian I disagree . Jesus the son of God is one with God and does not change, @Soyeong rightfully reminded me of that. I was not convinced by what I wrote. Simply because Jesus said;"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Mat 5:18.
The 10 Commandments are the core of the Law. Love is at the core of it all, we exist because of it, without love, all is lost.

I used change in the capacity that you used it, hence the reason why it was in quotations. I agree, Jesus and God are one and they do not change, at the time it felt like a digressed topic so I didn't press it but I was uneasy with the language of "change" (again why I left it in quotations, feel it was just a matter of semantics). There are however covenant relationships that establish as standards to live by. the covenant Moses was under is not the covenant we are under, nor the covenant Adam was under, this doesn't mean God has changed, it means we as a human race have changed (matured and advanced) to a point that covenant relationships have matured with us. We are in the new covenant, and by nature of its terminology it is not the old covenant and we should be expecting something different than the old, not the same. If it were the same thing, then we shouldn't be cutting it up and only choosing part of it and disregarding the rest of it.

Circumcision is a great example as it very clearly was a fleshly requirement for Abraham and Moses. is establishes the covenant relationship with Abraham in Gen 17 explicitly requiring the flesh, and Moses had a neardeath encounter for not valuing circumcision in the flesh. For Moses and Abraham physical circumcision was a part of God's law directly upon their lives. However countless times in the NT we are shown it is not the flesh that carries meaning and circumcision in the physical itself is not required but instead a circumcision of the heart, which is innately a spiritual value not a physical one. We should not expect physical circumcision as an outcome to spiritual circumcision, scripture is clear, if we are not circumcised, we do not need to be circumcised, and like wise, if we are circumcised we don't need to seek to reverse the process (1 Cor 7:18-19)

In Mat 5 Jesus applies his law, Christ's law, the law of love over the old covenant which first exposes the limitedness of the commandments in question as well as show us a better way, under Christ's law, of how to address matters of the heart. This is not a changed system just as the new covenant is not a changed covenant. it is a new covenant which is not the old covenant (this should be clear). No one is abolishing anything, but that doesn't mean we are under the old covenant.

Damian do you follow the Jesus of islam Isa Al Masih? what is your religion exactly so i can understand you better?

you might want to familiarize yourself with CF rules before asking something like that in a christain-only section.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

I used change in the capacity that you used it, hence the reason why it was in quotations. I agree, Jesus and God are one and they do not change, at the time it felt like a digressed topic so I didn't press it but I was uneasy with the language of "change" (again why I left it in quotations, feel it was just a matter of semantics). There are however covenant relationships that establish as standards to live by. the covenant Moses was under is not the covenant we are under, nor the covenant Adam was under, this doesn't mean God has changed, it means we as a human race have changed (matured and advanced) to a point that covenant relationships have matured with us. We are in the new covenant, and by nature of its terminology it is not the old covenant and we should be expecting something different than the old, not the same. If it were the same thing, then we shouldn't be cutting it up and only choosing part of it and disregarding the rest of it.

Jeremiah 31:31-34 is clear;
Jer 31:31 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:

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.

When did the new covenant start?, I see some people who follow the commandments and some obstinately refuse to do so completely, thinking they have only to believe in Jesus.

In bold in the verses above you can see that what is mentioned like putting the law into our hearts is not true for everyone at this point, could it be it will be applicable on Christ second coming? or has it partially started in the true believers? Jesus compared the Kingdom of heaven to a mustard seed, the smallest seed that grows to become a big garden plant. note also that in jer 31:34 "" after those days "" could mean after the reforestation of Israel and the return of Christ?

Circumcision is a great example as it very clearly was a fleshly requirement for Abraham and Moses. is establishes the covenant relationship with Abraham in Gen 17 explicitly requiring the flesh, and Moses had a neardeath encounter for not valuing circumcision in the flesh. For Moses and Abraham physical circumcision was a part of God's law directly upon their lives. However countless times in the NT we are shown it is not the flesh that carries meaning and circumcision in the physical itself is not required but instead a circumcision of the heart, which is innately a spiritual value not a physical one. We should not expect physical circumcision as an outcome to spiritual circumcision, scripture is clear, if we are not circumcised, we do not need to be circumcised, and like wise, if we are circumcised we don't need to seek to reverse the process (1 Cor 7:18-19)

n the Book of Acts, in Acts 15, the early church addressed the issue of circumcision for Gentile believers during the Jerusalem Council. The decision was that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised or follow the full law of Moses to be saved.

In Mat 5 Jesus applies his law, Christ's law, the law of love over the old covenant which first exposes the limitedness of the commandments in question as well as show us a better way, under Christ's law, of how to address matters of the heart. This is not a changed system just as the new covenant is not a changed covenant. it is a new covenant which is not the old covenant (this should be clear). No one is abolishing anything, but that doesn't mean we are under the old covenant.

The commandments are from GOD's Love for us, I am certain they will never change, Jesus explained them further or "magnified" them

you might want to familiarize yourself with CF rules before asking something like that in a christain-only section.

I have seen many non Christians before post in Christians only forums, it was an innocent question as we cannot see any information on you. Just wanted to know about your denomination and what you wrote under your name ""follower of Isa Al MAssih"" which is used in orthodox Islam that is all.

 

[DamianWarS]

In bold in the verses above you can see that what is mentioned like putting the law into our hearts is not true for everyone at this point, could it be it will be applicable on Christ second coming? or has it partially started in the true believers? Jesus compared the Kingdom of heaven to a mustard seed, the smallest seed that grows to become a big garden plant. note also that in jer 31:34 "" after those days "" could mean after the reforestation of Israel and the return of Christ?

What did he put in our hearts? You seem to only see the 10 commandments. I fail to see where it says that. "of the heart" is innately a spiritual focus and deals with the core of our self. I wouldn't expect law verbatim written upon our hearts because that seems a little one dementional. Since we have revelation where we see laws have much deeper meanings like circumcision, dietary laws, separating laws, sacrificial laws, etc.... it should be this deeper meaning upon our hearts since the other is already mass produced, and widely available.

n the Book of Acts, in Acts 15, the early church addressed the issue of circumcision for Gentile believers during the Jerusalem Council. The decision was that Gentiles did not need to be circumcised or follow the full law of Moses to be saved.

Law of Moses (this includes the 10 commandments). If circumsion is viewed this way what does that tell us about how to approach the law of Moses?

The commandments are from GOD's Love for us, I am certain they will never change, Jesus explained them further or "magnified" them

What commandments are those? Are you just conflating this word with the 10 commandments? Where is your support? All of Torah is his commandments, including the ones you don't keep. Christ did not magnify the law, he exposed it, then gave us a better way to approach matters of the heart. He might as well said "fixed it" at the end of each comment.

I have seen many non Christians before post in Christians only forums, it was an innocent question as we cannot see any information on you. Just wanted to know about your denomination and what you wrote under your name ""follower of Isa Al MAssih"" which is used in orthodox Islam that is all.

Thanks for the clarity, my profile is listed as a Christian if there was any confusion. I also speak another language that uses this term and it's an identity of Christ that I have in that language.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Of course the law of Moses includes the Ten Commandments- the law of God is meant for everyone. The Ten Commandments was always separated Exo 34:28 Deut 4:13 and started way before they were written down by the finger of God in Mt Sinai.

 

[Leaf473]

note also that in jer 31:34 "" after those days "" could mean after the reforestation of Israel and the return of Christ?

Hi It could mean that the writing of the law in our hearts and minds takes place sometime long after the New Covenant begins. Myself, I think the more plain reading is that the New Covenant is what begins after the time that Israel disregarded the Old Covenant.

Bible Gateway passage: Hebrews 8:10 - New International Reader's Version

This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds. I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God. And they will be my people.

www.biblegateway.com

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

What did he put in our hearts? You seem to only see the 10 commandments. I fail to see where it says that. "of the heart" is innately a spiritual focus and deals with the core of our self. I wouldn't expect law verbatim written upon our hearts because that seems a little one dementional. Since we have revelation where we see laws have much deeper meanings like circumcision, dietary laws, separating laws, sacrificial laws, etc.... it should be this deeper meaning upon our hearts since the other is already mass produced, and widely available.

Law of Moses (this includes the 10 commandments). If circumsion is viewed this way what does that tell us about how to approach the law of Moses?

What commandments are those? Are you just conflating this word with the 10 commandments? Where is your support? All of Torah is his commandments, including the ones you don't keep. Christ did not magnify the law, he exposed it, then gave us a better way to approach matters of the heart. He might as well said "fixed it" at the end of each comment.

Thanks for the clarity, my profile is listed as a Christian if there was any confusion. I also speak another language that uses this term and it's an identity of Christ that I have in that language.

Well i can't see your profile it says, this member limits who can view this profile...

 

[DamianWarS]

Well i can't see your profile it says, this member limits who can view this profile

Stats under the avatar if you're using a computer, for a phone I don't know how you see it, probably need to enable desktop mode so it looks like a computer. You have a limited profile too yet I know your "Faith" is "Non-Denom" which is good enough for me to know you are Christian, but aside from that, for me, you are implicitly a Christian if you are posting in a Christian-only part of CF. My Faith stat under my avatar says I'm a Christian. I just tried to figure out where to set that and I can't seem to find it under account details. I also have blank details that are required, like country/city so I suspect there has been some changes since the last time I set this (although faith seems odd to remove when I can still set my political affiliation)

 

[HIM]

The royal law is not pertaining to respect to persons and the ten... I don't know where you got this idea to throw on "and the 10" at the end.

You can do better. We Never said it was. How you got what you did we have no idea. It is a list of the laws James mentions from the Book of the Law. as the first sentence alludes to. They are the royal Law of love, the law pertaining to respect to persons and the Ten.

"James mentions laws which are mentioned throughout the Book of the Law. The royal Law of Love. The law pertaining TO respect to persons and the Ten."



The truth of the quote you responded to but keep ignoring was the actual point of the post and what needs realized. It says,

"All of which He connects to the perfect Law, that of Liberty which is called such because it is engrafted into us because we are begotten by the Word of truth and are a new creation. So let's not forget what manner of man we are and be a doer of the word that is engrafted and not a forgetful hearer. For we will be judged by that which is engrafted, the perfect Law that of Liberty, freedom."

This is Christ applying his royal law over the sabbath, and this royal law may be applied over all torah the same way essentially meaning it is lawful to do the royal law over x action of the Torah no matter what that law is.

No the law and the prophets depend on Love to be fulfilled. We can't keep them without being of the Love of God. For without Him we can do nothing. For in Him we live move and have our being. It is He that works in us both to will and do His good pleasure.

there is no difference, yet the term needs to be qualified critically and not just conflated. it is clear for Abraham and Moses that circumcision in the flesh was God's law. in the flesh is explicit in the Abrahamic covenant in Gen 17 and Moses was almost killed for not performing it. Yet new covenant understanding does value circumcision in the flesh and it's deeper meaning of identifying with the fullness of Christ has been revealed. So Christ's law/God's law does mean spiritual circumcision but it does not mean circumcision of the flesh, even though it did mean that for Moses and Abraham.

It was always about spiritual circumcision. Abraham knew what was entailed by it, for he OBEYED GOD'S VOICE and walked in it.

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

Deut 10:16 Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

Since circumcision is clearly established in these ways through the new covenant that same measure can be applied to all of Torah with a value of seeking it "in the heart" with the understanding that the outward product may be effected as well. The 10 say not to steal, lie, murder, etc... the sum of which is a person who does not steal, lie, murder, etc... however the Christ's law, the law of love, the golden law as James defines it is more than the sum total of the moral aspects of the 10. I may not murder my neighbour, steal from him, lie to him, covet his belongings or sleep with his wife yet harbour hate in my heart for him. The former is the sum of lawful actions according to the 10, the latter breaks them all making those supposed lawful actions void. So Christ's law is greater than the sum total of the 10 itself, thus it cannot be a product of the 10 or merely a summary of it.

No The Law of Love makes sin void, in that we are not sinning. If we are sinning then the Law is not void. For the Law is for the sinner. So use the law lawfully.


1Tim 1:7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.
1Tim 1:8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
1Tim 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

 

[dogs4thewin]

Mod hat on

This thread has undergone a small clean up for flaming

Mod hat off

 

[DamianWarS]

The law pertaining TO respect to persons and the Ten.

I'm not sure how else to word this. I was negating it saying the "and the ten" part at the end cannot be supported and is an issue of conflating terms without scriptural support.

It is a rather wordy line, could you make it more concise as the use of "pertaining to" and "respect to" seem redundant.

 

[DamianWarS]

Isa Al Masih means the Messiah in Islam. With that understood, with the understanding that Islam only proclaims Jesus to be a prophet. Then If one proclaims to be a follower of this teaching, they proclaim this and also the teaching that He was not crucified and was not resurrected since this what Islam teaches about Jesus.

I think the key take away here is "...in Islam". I am not a Muslim and I don't follow Islam, so how something is defined in Islam has no rule over me.

But to be clear Isa Al Masih means Jesus the Messiah rooted in Arabic. Other languages have also adopted this terminology too. It's in my bible I read, it's preached at the pulpit from mainstream Christian denominations, and it's formed an identify of Christ I have in this language.

I don't know why I need to be defending myself this way, and it is against CF to even question someone's faith not to mention a pretty low ball if you're just trying to discredit me.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

The Bible presents two significant covenants: the Old Covenant, established between God and Israel, and the New Covenant, fulfilled through Jesus Christ. The Old Covenant was marked by God giving the Ten Commandments, written directly by Him on stone tablets—an enduring medium to signify the permanence of His law (Exodus 31:18). Alongside these commandments, the law included various ceremonial and civil ordinances, given through Moses, which shaped Israel's relationship with God. However, Israel’s inability to fully keep these laws led to the need for a New Covenant, one that would transform the heart rather than rely on external adherence. Through Scripture, we see that this New Covenant was foretold by the prophets and established through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. But two key questions arise: When did the New Covenant begin, and who is included under it?

When Did the New Covenant Begin?

The New Covenant’s inauguration is closely linked to the death of Jesus Christ, though its establishment was foreshadowed throughout His ministry. During the Last Supper, Jesus explicitly speaks of the New Covenant, using the imagery of His blood as the means through which it is sealed. In **Matthew 26:28**, Jesus says:

"For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

Here, Jesus refers to His upcoming death as the pivotal moment when the New Covenant would be established. His sacrifice on the cross was to be the final and perfect offering for the forgiveness of sins, replacing the continual sacrifices required under the Old Covenant. This sacrificial act marked the beginning of the New Covenant, fulfilling God's promises made through the prophets, such as in Jeremiah 31:31-34.

However, while Jesus declared the New Covenant at the Last Supper, it was His death that formally inaugurated it. As He died on the cross, His words—“It is finished” (John 19:30) signaled the completion of the atonement process, confirming that His death fulfilled the necessary requirements to initiate the New Covenant.

The resurrection of Jesus further solidified this. It demonstrated not only victory over death but the full power of the New Covenant, which promises not only forgiveness of sins but also eternal life. After His resurrection, Jesus commissioned His disciples to spread this message to all nations, extending the reach of this covenant beyond the boundaries of Israel. In Matthew 28:19, Jesus commands:

"Go 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."

Thus, while the New Covenant was declared during the Last Supper, it was fully inaugurated through the death and resurrection of Jesus, marking a new era in God's relationship with humanity.

Who is Under the New Covenant?

The question of who is included in the New Covenant is equally important. While the Old Covenant was established primarily with the nation of Israel (Exodus 19:5-6), the New Covenant, though promised initially to Israel, expands far beyond one nation. The Scriptures reveal that the New Covenant includes not only Israel but also Gentiles anyone who obeys and believes in God’s promises.

The Old Testament prophets spoke of this inclusion. For instance, Isaiah 42:6 foretells the role of the Messiah as a light to the Gentiles:

"I, the LORD, have called You in righteousness, and will hold Your hand; I will keep You and give You as a covenant to the people, as a light to the Gentiles."

This passage suggests that the work of the Messiah, and by extension the New Covenant, would not be confined to Israel alone but would extend to the nations. This universal scope is echoed in Jeremiah 31:31-34 where God promises a New Covenant with the house of Israel and Judah but also hints at a future where all people could be part of His covenant.

Jesus Himself spoke of this broader inclusion. In John 10:16, He refers to “other sheep” who are not part of the Jewish fold but will be gathered into one flock under one shepherd:

"And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd."

This statement points to the inclusion of Gentiles—non-Jews—into the fold of God’s covenant people. The New Covenant was never meant to be exclusive to Israel but was part of God's plan to unite all people under Him.

After His resurrection, Jesus further solidified this inclusive nature of the New Covenant by instructing His disciples to spread the gospel to all nations, Matthew 28:19; signaling that the blessings of the New Covenant were for everyone—Jews and Gentiles alike.

The prophets also foreshadowed this global inclusion. In Isaiah 56:6-7; God speaks of bringing foreigners, Gentiles into His covenant community:

"Also the sons of the foreigner who join themselves to the LORD, to serve Him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be His servants even them I will bring to My holy mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer."

This passage reinforces the idea that the New Covenant is not just for Israel but for all who love and serve God, regardless of their ethnic background. The inclusion of the Gentiles into God's covenant community is a fulfillment of the promises made to Abraham, that through him "all nations of the earth shall be blessed Genesis 22:18.

Conclusion

The New Covenant was formally established through the sacrificial death and victorious resurrection of Jesus Christ. His blood, shed on the cross, marked the moment when the Old Covenant gave way to the New, fulfilling God's promises and offering a once-for-all sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins. A critical moment that highlights this transition is found in Matthew 27:51, where it is recorded that at the moment of Jesus' death, “the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.”

This tearing of the temple veil symbolizes the removal of the barrier between God and humanity. Under the Old Covenant, only the high priest could enter the Holy of Holies once a year, but with the New Covenant, access to God is opened to all who believe. This event signifies the end of the Old Covenant's sacrificial system and the direct access to God provided through Christ.

Both Jews and Gentiles who respond in faith and obedience are welcomed into the New Covenant, where God's law is written on their hearts, and forgiveness is offered through the perfect sacrifice of Christ. This is a covenant of Love and relationship, where anyone who loves and serves the Lord is included, regardless of their background or heritage.

Thus, the New Covenant is a global and inclusive promise, extending the blessings of salvation to all who seek God, making them part of His eternal kingdom.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

I think the key take away here is "...in Islam". I am not a Muslim and I don't follow Islam, so how something is defined in Islam has no rule over me.

But to be clear Isa Al Masih means Jesus the Messiah rooted in Arabic. Other languages have also adopted this terminology too. It's in my bible I read, it's preached at the pulpit from mainstream Christian denominations, and it's formed an identify of Christ I have in this language.

I don't know why I need to be definending myself this way, and it is against CF to even questions someone's faith not to mention a pretty low ball if you're just trying to discredit me.

I think the key take away here is "...in Islam". I am not a Muslim and I don't follow Islam, so how something is defined in Islam has no rule over me.

But to be clear Isa Al Masih means Jesus the Messiah rooted in Arabic. Other languages have also adopted this terminology too. It's in my bible I read, it's preached at the pulpit from mainstream Christian denominations, and it's formed an identify of Christ I have in this language.

I don't know why I need to be definending myself this way, and it is against CF to even questions someone's faith not to mention a pretty low ball if you're just trying to discredit me.

You do not need to defend yourself. would you share with us ( or not it's os ok) what version of the bible you read, I wanted to ask you this for a long time. I read mostly NKJV and KJV in french I read mostly Louis Second and Crampon versions.

THank you

 

[HIM]

If you knew anything about SDA you would know everything is tested through the bible, which is why I only quote scripture and most of it reads plainly if we allow it to.

We asked if Ellen had written anything on it. SDA evangelist, Pastors, elders and laity are what one would see and hear from here and elsewhere. Many proclaim commentary that Ellen had not. And sadly are not right all the time. That is one of the reasons why the questioned was asked.

Edited to say
Out of curiousity I looked it up

The Great Hope (Adapted)

As you go through life, you may sense that the world is gripped in a conflict between good and evil. From what you see in the news it may look as if …

text.egwwritings.org

She did not write the Good Hope. She did write the Great Controversy in which the Great Hope was adapted from. Most Adventist I know denounce that Book because of that.


Be that as it may she says on page 466 in ther Great Controversy, "The apostle James, who wrote after the death of Christ, refers to the decalogue as the “royal law,” and the “perfect law of liberty.”
Well that is pretty self explanatory. The decalogue according to her is called the royal and the law of liberty by James.

And this most definitely is not supported by anything you wrote here or is it supported by the context of the passage.

So with that being stated. everything she penned was not inspired.

But the difference between our thinking and yours is that does not make her a false prophet. She would only be a false prophet if she in her writings or speech said this was a thus saith the Lord and she had not as far as I can tell.

So we ask. was all that was penned in the Great Controversy said to be inspired? Or that fact that she was told to write it inspired? There is a difference.

Christ in His Sanctuary

The sanctuary in heaven is the very center of Christ's work in behalf of men. It concerns every soul living upon the earth. It opens to view the plan…

text.egwwritings.org

To say, "The apostle James admonishes his brethren: “So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.” is not saying the Law of liberty and the royal Law is the Decalogue. as she said in the Great Controversy.

The Law is a broad term that is not just referring to the Decalogue.