law discussions belong in the law/sabbath area, or controvertial.

[SabbathBlessings]

Nothing here about the old covenant Sabbath being commanded in the new covenant. Lots of random verses though. Crickets.

The New Covenant is about being grafted in by faith. Faith is knowing when our Father said He wrote Ten Commandments Deut4:13 Exo 34:26 and called them His commandments Exo 20:6, knowing when He placed HIS LAWS, in our hearts they would include all of them, not forgetting the only commandment He said Remember and is holy, blessed and sanctified by the God of the Universe, hence why Jesus who is God kept them including the Sabbath and is supposed to be our example to follow 1John2:6 1 Peter 2:21-22

But believe as you wish. Be well.

 

[Hentenza]

The New Covenant is about being grafted in by faith. Faith is knowing when our Father said He wrote Ten Commandments Deut4:13 Exo 34:26 and called them His commandments Exo 20:6, knowing when He placed HIS LAWS, in our hearts they would include all of them, not forgetting the only commandment He said Remember and is holy, blessed and sanctified by the God of the Universe, hence why Jesus who is God kept them including the Sabbath and is supposed to be our example to follow 1John2:6 1 Peter 2:21-22

But believe as you wish. Be well.

Again, show me where in the new covenant the sabbath observance is required. You have words but no evidence. Remember that a new contract includes the terms. No terms about the sabbath observance in the new contract.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Again, show me where in the new covenant the sabbath observance is required. You have words but no evidence. Remember that a new contract includes the terms. No terms about the sabbath observance in the new contract.

The terms was that the New Covenant is established on better promises Heb8:6 nowhere does it say I will write all new laws in our hearts and minds. Or 9 of the Ten forgetting the only commandment that I said to Remember and that I blessed and only I can reverse My blessing and only I can sanctify Eze20:12 not something man can do despite our best efforts Isa66:17

God promised the words of the covenant He would not alter Psa 89:34. not a Jot or tittle. Mat5:18 why is God of the Universe writing and telling us what His laws are, not good enough? Sorry I do not understand this argument. Jesus keeping them who is God as our example, not good enough. I think we might have different definitions of what faith is.

The NC still has God's laws Heb8:10 not new laws, because He promised He would not alter the words of the covenant- why the location was changed from written on stone to written on the heart Heb8:10 2Cor3:3 based on the better promise of what He will do Heb8:10 John 14:15-18 why we see Sabbath-keeping all throughout the NC before and after the Cross and for eternity.

I think we are at an impasse. I am okay agreeing to disagree.

 

[RandyPNW]

The terms was that the New Covenant is established on better promises Heb8:6 nowhere does it say I will write all new laws in our hearts and minds. Or 9 of the Ten forgetting the only commandment that I said to Remember and that I blessed and only I can reverse My blessing and only I can sanctify Eze20:12 not something man can do despite our best efforts Isa66:17

God promised the words of the covenant He would not alter Psa 89:34. not a Jot or tittle. Mat5:18 why is God of the Universe writing and telling us what His laws are, not good enough? Sorry I do not understand this argument. Jesus keeping them who is God as our example, not good enough. I think we might have different definitions of what faith is.

The NC still has God's laws Heb8:10 not new laws, because He promised He would not alter the words of the covenant- why the location was changed from written on stone to written on the heart Heb8:10 2Cor3:3 based on the better promise of what He will do Heb8:10 John 14:15-18 why we see Sabbath-keeping all throughout the NC before and after the Cross and for eternity.

I think we are at an impasse. I am okay agreeing to disagree.

Yes, we may all agree to disagree. But when you close out with yet one more argument *that you have not answered* then you're essentially agreeing to let the discussion continue.

Above you argue that Jesus said every requirement under the Law remained inviolable. That would be in Matthew 5.

But I've already suggested to you that when Jesus said this *he was still living under the era of the Law of Moses, ie under the Old Covenant still!* So, why are you quoting an argument for what the New Covenant consists of by referring to Old Covenant terms?

It was only under the Old Covenant that they were supposed to keep all 613 or so laws. Jesus arguing for them is just a restatement of the efficacy of those laws under the Old Covenant system, and says nothing about the New Covenant system except that Jesus said he would fulfill them in himself.

What this means to me is that Jesus was conceding the fact that those who kept the Laws of Moses were simply agreeing that their works under the Law were insufficient to fulfill the Law, and could never obtain Eternal Life apart from Christ. Though Israel kept all 613 or so laws, it would only please God under a temporary system, and still could not achieve in itself Eternal Life.

So, if you wish to close the arguments down on the Sabbath you cannot close using this argument. Sorry, I don't mean to extend our disagreement indefinitely. But what you're trying to close out with ignores the fact I pointed this out before, and you didn't adequately address this, or acknowledge this point. Of course, I could've missed it?

Finally, I agree with the brother who is asking you for clear-cut terms of the New Covenant that require Sabbath observance. You have not shown that. In fact, Paul seems to argue for the opposite, indicating we shouldn't even be arguing for special days, etc. under the Law of Moses.

Keeping the Law showed Israel two very important facts.
1) The barriers against Sin presented under the Law showed Israel they did not have direct access to God or to the Tree of Life. They had temple curtains used as barriers, and they had laws of sacrifice offering temporary atonement.
2) Even keeping all 613 or so laws Israel was viewed as still in need of purification, meaning that they were still sinners and ineligible for the Tree of Life.

So, keeping all of the requirements of the Law of Moses, including Sabbath Law, was insufficient for direct access to God and for obtaining Eternal Life. We must accomplish this through Jesus, who alone fulfilled the Law by his own Deity and sinlessness.

We do obey Divine Law, but it is the Law of the Spirit by which we abide in Jesus and live through him and through his love. The 613 requirements are passe, brother!

The morals involved in all of these OT laws have now been redirected through Christ and through the New Covenant. And the New Covenant only requires that we commit to Jesus and to his holiness, or to his way instead of to our own carnal way. All of the regulations of the Law are now summed up in "Abide in him!"

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Yes, we may all agree to disagree. But when you close out with yet one more argument *that you have not answered* then you're essentially agreeing to let the discussion continue.

Above you argue that Jesus said every requirement under the Law remained inviolable. That would be in Matthew 5.

But I've already suggested to you that when Jesus said this *he was still living under the era of the Law of Moses, ie under the Old Covenant still!* So, why are you quoting an argument for what the New Covenant consists of by referring to Old Covenant terms?

It was only under the Old Covenant that they were supposed to keep all 613 or so laws. Jesus arguing for them is just a restatement of the efficacy of those laws under the Old Covenant system, and says nothing about the New Covenant system except that Jesus said he would fulfill them in himself.

What this means to me is that Jesus was conceding the fact that those who kept the Laws of Moses were simply agreeing that their works under the Law were insufficient to fulfill the Law, and could never obtain Eternal Life apart from Christ. Though Israel kept all 613 or so laws, it would only please God under a temporary system, and still could not achieve in itself Eternal Life.

So, if you wish to close the arguments down on the Sabbath you cannot close using this argument. Sorry, I don't mean to extend our disagreement indefinitely. But what you're trying to close out with ignores the fact I pointed this out before, and you didn't adequately address this, or acknowledge this point. Of course, I could've missed it?

Finally, I agree with the brother who is asking you for clear-cut terms of the New Covenant that require Sabbath observance. You have not shown that. In fact, Paul seems to argue for the opposite, indicating we shouldn't even be arguing for special days, etc. under the Law of Moses.

Keeping the Law showed Israel two very important facts.
1) The barriers against Sin presented under the Law showed Israel they did not have direct access to God or to the Tree of Life. They had temple curtains used as barriers, and they had laws of sacrifice offering temporary atonement.
2) Even keeping all 613 or so laws Israel was viewed as still in need of purification, meaning that they were still sinners and ineligible for the Tree of Life.

So, keeping all of the requirements of the Law of Moses, including Sabbath Law, was insufficient for direct access to God and for obtaining Eternal Life. We must accomplish this through Jesus, who alone fulfilled the Law by his own Deity and sinlessness.

We do obey Divine Law, but it is the Law of the Spirit by which we abide in Jesus and live through him and through his love. The 613 requirements are passe, brother!

The morals involved in all of these OT laws have now been redirected through Christ and through the New Covenant. And the New Covenant only requires that we commit to Jesus and to his holiness, or to his way instead of to our own carnal way. All of the regulations of the Law are now summed up in "Abide in him!"

I can't reason when someone uses their words as if its the same as Scripture. If you want to post Scripture to make your points I might engage.

I don't know who ever spoke of 613 laws, and why elevate a non-Biblical number over a Biblical one Deut4:13 Exo 34:28

 

[RandyPNW]

I can't reason when someone uses their words as if its the same as Scripture. If you want to post Scripture to make your points I might engage.

I don't know who ever spoke of 613 laws, and why elevate a non-Biblical number over a Biblical one Deut4:13 Exo 34:28

That's a pretty weak diversion, brother! You know the issue was not a matter of how many requirements there were under the Law of Moses. I use that number, borrowed from the Jews, to be clear that I'm speaking of the entire Law, and not just Sabbath Law, or Moral Law, or the 10 Commandments, etc. The Old Covenant was required in full, as Jesus said in Matt 5.

So, you are diverting away from the main issue, which was that you were quoting Jesus when he spoke under the Old Covenant system and spoke with respect to that Old Covenant--not the New Covenant. By contrast, he said that he had come to "fulfill" it in some way, which we now know was in himself and at the cross. All of those requirements were "nailed to the cross," as Paul said.

I do recall that you argued, I believe, that Jesus said the Law would be in effect "until the heavens pass away." But if that was true we would now be under the Old Covenant still, and we are not!

So, what did Jesus mean by saying that until he fulfilled these laws they would remain in effect, and that they were as inviolable as the universe itself? What he meant was that until he fulfilled those laws in himself and on this earth we cannot dismiss the Law and its fulfillment in him. And until he fulfilled the part at the cross Israel would be required of it in total.

The fulfillment of the Law, therefore, is taking place in two stages. One, at the cross Israel stopped being required to live under those laws. Two, in the current age of the New Covenant we now live in Christ as the fulfillment of the Law, which is simply his spiritual righteousness.

It has nothing to do with counting how many requirements there were under the Law of Moses. It has everything to do with the New Covenant being in effect as the "fulfillment" of that Covenant *in Jesus himself.*

I deeply resent your continued claim that I am making my words "equal with Scriptures." I have never done this! That is slanderous. It seems you cannot be challenged without making a personal attack? That only shows the weakness of your position when you do that.

 

[Hentenza]

I can't reason when someone uses their words as if its the same as Scripture. If you want to post Scripture to make your points I might engage.

I don't know who ever spoke of 613 laws, and why elevate a non-Biblical number over a Biblical one Deut4:13 Exo 34:28

There you go. A list of all 613 laws including book and verse.

A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments) - Judaism 101 (JewFAQ)

A list of the 613 mitzvot (commandments) that are binding on Jews.

www.jewfaq.org

 

[SabbathBlessings]

There you go. A list of all 613 laws including book and verse.

A List of the 613 Mitzvot (Commandments) - Judaism 101 (JewFAQ)

A list of the 613 mitzvot (commandments) that are binding on Jews.

www.jewfaq.org

You will not find the number 613 in Scripture, but God gave His commandments a number- Ten Deut 4:13 Exo 34:28 , not 613, not 9 or 1. He numbered them Himself, He wrote them Himself Exo 31:18 , He claimed them as His Exo 20:6 Deut4:13 , He placed them inside the ark of the covenant Exo40:20 under His mercy seat Exo 25:21 in the Most Holy of His Temple Exo 26:34 revealed also in heaven In the NT Rev 11:19 Rev 15:5

 

[SabbathBlessings]

That's a pretty weak diversion, brother! You know the issue was not a matter of how many requirements there were under the Law of Moses. I use that number, borrowed from the Jews, to be clear that I'm speaking of the entire Law, and not just Sabbath Law, or Moral Law, or the 10 Commandments, etc. The Old Covenant was required in full, as Jesus said in Matt 5.

So, you are diverting away from the main issue, which was that you were quoting Jesus when he spoke under the Old Covenant system and spoke with respect to that Old Covenant--not the New Covenant. By contrast, he said that he had come to "fulfill" it in some way, which we now know was in himself and at the cross. All of those requirements were "nailed to the cross," as Paul said.

I do recall that you argued, I believe, that Jesus said the Law would be in effect "until the heavens pass away." But if that was true we would now be under the Old Covenant still, and we are not!

So, what did Jesus mean by saying that until he fulfilled these laws they would remain in effect, and that they were as inviolable as the universe itself? What he meant was that until he fulfilled those laws in himself and on this earth we cannot dismiss the Law and its fulfillment in him. And until he fulfilled the part at the cross Israel would be required of it in total.

The fulfillment of the Law, therefore, is taking place in two stages. One, at the cross Israel stopped being required to live under those laws. Two, in the current age of the New Covenant we now live in Christ as the fulfillment of the Law, which is simply his spiritual righteousness.

It has nothing to do with counting how many requirements there were under the Law of Moses. It has everything to do with the New Covenant being in effect as the "fulfillment" of that Covenant *in Jesus himself.*

I deeply resent your continued claim that I am making my words "equal with Scriptures." I have never done this! That is slanderous. It seems you cannot be challenged without making a personal attack? That only shows the weakness of your position when you do that.

Sorry, as I stated I am not going to engage with opinions over Scripture, Its an impossible battle to win. If you want to post Scripture to support your ideas, otherwise until then, take care.

 

[RandyPNW]

Sorry, as I stated I am not going to engage with opinions over Scripture, Its an impossible battle to win. If you want to post Scripture to support your ideas, otherwise until then, take care.

Everything we do in these debates over Scriptures has to do with "opinions" and "Scriptures." Please don't be so "difficult" as to think that only you provide truth and Scriptural backing. Everything I've said has in fact been backed by the very Scriptures you have errantly used as your backing, namely Matt 5.

Are you incapable of recognizing or acknowledging that Jesus was speaking, in Mat 5 (the Sermon on the Mt.), of the Old Covenant and that he was speaking while still under the Law? The Scripture itself plainly places this Sermon *beforre* the Cross and the New Covenant!

Jesus was specifically *citing the Law of Moses* when he said these things. And he specifically said he was "fulfilling" the Law.

We see at least part of that fulfillment at the Cross. The rest of the fulfillment is our choice to live in his righteousness as the fulfillment of the Law, which excludes the entire set of laws under the Old Covenant and repackages their moral law under the New Covenant.

That moral law that now exists is simply "following Jesus" or "abiding in him."

Matt 5.17 “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. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

Matt 26.52 “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?”
55 In that hour Jesus said to the crowd, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? Every day I sat in the temple courts teaching, and you did not arrest me. 56 But this has all taken place that the writings of the prophets might be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples deserted him and fled.

Rom 1.17 For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith..."
3.21 But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness is given through faith in[h] Jesus Christ to all who believe.

The "faith" that we live by, from "first to last," is faith in Jesus and in his righteousness alone, as opposed to faith in keeping the 10 Commandments or the Law.

Moral Law was evident from the creation of Man.

Gen 1. 26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule.

Under the Law, while Jesus' earthly ministry carried on, his Disciples were required to "abide in him and in his teachings." After the cross, after the veil of the Temple was rent, Christians are still required to "abide in Jesus and in his teachings," although apart from the Old Covenant and its laws.

When we follow Jesus we follow his image and likeness, which is superior to the Old Covenant carrying the laws that Israel followed. What is superior is the fact that under the Law Israel remained condemned for their sins. And under the New Covenant we obtain forgiveness for our sins when we "abide in him and in his morality."

We cannot even follow Jesus' morality and record of righteousness perfectly. But in "abiding in him" we obtain as a free gift his righteousness and benefit from his flawless record. It would be terrible if we had to keep the commandments as perfectly as he did!

John 15.4 Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.

I think the important thing to recognize here is that my emphasis is on the fact Jesus *fulfills* the righteousness of the Law *in himself,* while you seem to think he fulfilled the Law as the Moral Commandments, which you believe were contained, separately, in the Law. You also believe the Moral Commandments included the Sabbath Law.

In my view, Jesus is the source of our righteousness, requiring that our Salvation is based on dependance upon him. And the only set of laws we may be obligated to are those that conform to who he is like, before and after the Law.

It certainly does not mean we have to be as sinless as Jesus or that we must obey the Law of Moses. The Son of Man is Lord of the Law, and became a curse under the Law so that we would be freed from it. And Jesus' righteousness is superior to Sabbath Law.

Matt 12.8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.

Gal 3.13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.”

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Matt 5.17 “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. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

Let’s work on one Scripture at a time.

Is your opinion fulfilled means the same as destroyed i.e. no longer need to keep. Are you claiming Jesus came to destroy i.e. end His law of righteousness (right doing) Psa 119:172 that He was prophesied to magnify Isa 42:21 which means make greater, but failed that and just ended the law.

So are you claiming that we can now worship other gods, bow to images, vain His holy name, steal, covet, commit murder or break the least of these commandments that Jesus warned not to in a couple verses down. Mat 5:19

Another question do you think Moses is God? Does Moses have a mercy seat?

 

[Hentenza]

You will not find the number 613 in Scripture, but God gave His commandments a number- Ten Deut 4:13 Exo 34:28 , not 613, not 9 or 1. He numbered them Himself, He wrote them Himself Exo 31:18 , He claimed them as His Exo 20:6 Deut4:13 , He placed them inside the ark of the covenant Exo40:20 under His mercy seat Exo 25:21 in the Most Holy of His Temple Exo 26:34 revealed also in heaven In the NT Rev 11:19 Rev 15:5

I linked the list and the book and verse location of each one. They are all in scripture. If you don’t believe it then you are welcome to count them.

 

[RandyPNW]

Let’s work on one Scripture at a time.

Is your opinion fulfilled means the same as destroyed i.e. no longer need to keep. Are you claiming Jesus came to destroy i.e. end His law of righteousness (right doing) Psa 119:172 that He was prophesied to magnify Isa 42:21 which means make greater, but failed that and just ended the law.

So are you claiming that we can now worship other gods, bow to images, vain His holy name, steal, covet, commit murder or break the least of these commandments that Jesus warned not to in a couple verses down. Mat 5:19

Another question do you think Moses is God? Does Moses have a mercy seat?

Sorry, I had to re-work my previous post, to include more explanation. Perhaps that will answer your questions?

Again, I do not believe the New Covenant is lawlessness. Many of the same principles contained in the Old Covenant are contained in the New Covenant. But Jesus' righteousness is the new package. Instead of referring "do not murder" in the 10 Commandments Moses gave I would refer you to "do not murder" in Jesus' righteousness in the New Covenant.

God gave both covenants, and He remains the same. But conditions evolve in the New Covenant because Jesus died on the cross and became a curse for us so that we don't have to live under requirements that condemn us. And that includes all that came under the Old Covenant system.

So, we should refer any moral law to the New Covenant system, which is based on what Christ did. And he did it so that we can participate in his righteousness, as opposed to having to do it *perfectly.*

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I linked the list and the book and verse location of each one. They are all in scripture. If you don’t believe it then you are welcome to count them.

God only numbered one Law, not 613, or 1 or 9.

He claimed them as His.

Deut 4:13 So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.

I have never discussed the other laws that were set besides the ark written by Moses Deut 31:24-26 , totally different laws that serves a different purpose.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Sorry, I had to re-work my previous post, to include more explanation. Perhaps that will answer your questions?

I am not going to go back to your post. If you want to discuss here thats fine, if not thats fine too. I am only interested in addressing one Scripture at a time, I am not interested in a novel of what someone thinks the Scriptures mean, lets post and discuss what the Scriptures actually say. . If not no worries, take care.

 

[Hentenza]

God only numbered one Law, not 613, or 1 or 9.

He claimed them as His.

Deut 4:13 So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.

I have never discussed the other laws that were set besides the ark written by Moses, totally different law that serves a different purpose.

I gave you the list. Are those verses not in scripture as part of the old covenant? Are you now saying that the Jewish law only included the 10 commandments and no other laws like the ritual laws or the dietary laws?

 

[SabbathBlessings]

I gave you the list. Are those verses not in scripture as part of the old covenant? Are you now saying that the Jewish law only included the 10 commandments and no other laws like the ritual laws?

I’m not sure if you’ re reading my post or just not understanding. God’s covenant consists of Ten Commandment. He states this verbatim Exo 34:28 Deut 4:13 thats the number God gave nothing more, nothing less. He claimed this unit as His- not Moses

Exo 34:28 So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the [a]Ten Commandments.

Deut 4:13 So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.

There is not 613 , just Ten, not nine, not 1, what I have been talking about the whole time.

The law of Moses is not God’s Ten Commandments, its all the others laws that were placed besides the ark there as a witness against as it contained all of the curses for breaking God’s covenant the Ten Commandments.

I think it’s time I move on. We have been discussing this for days now and I know I am not going to change my mind, and I think you mind is set in stone too. Meaning it’s not changing, where people get this term from God writing in stone because it’s settled. Psa 89:34 Psa 119:89 Rev 15:5 Rev 11:19

I do really wish you well.

 

[RandyPNW]

I am not going to go back to your post. If you want to discuss here thats fine, if not thats fine too. I am only interested in addressing one Scripture at a time, I am not interested in a novel of what someone thinks the Scriptures mean, lets post and discuss what the Scriptures actually say. . If not no worries, take care.

You aren't interested in knowing what I said then? I get it.

What you're trying to do is break the stream of thought down into such component parts that the big picture is lost. Divide and conquer? I get it.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

You aren't interested in knowing what I said then? I get it.

What you're trying to do is break the stream of thought down into such component parts that the big picture is lost. Divide and conquer? I get it.

I’m trying to stay focused on one Scripture to see if we can make sense of what is its true meaning and if our version of Jesus saying one thing in one verse and than has Jesus says the complete opposite in couple verses down how that makes sense. I asked specific questions to this one verse, I am not going to sort through a previous long post. I just want to focus on one verse. If you don‘t want to answer my questions directly, it’s okay. Be well.

 

[Hentenza]

I’m not sure if you’ re reading my post or just not understanding. God’s covenant consists of Ten Commandment. He states this verbatim Exo 34:28 Deut 4:13 thats the number God gave nothing more, nothing less. He claimed this unit as His- not Moses

Exo 34:28 So he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water. And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the [a]Ten Commandments.

Deut 4:13 So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.

There is not 613 , just Ten, not nine, not 1, what I have been talking about the whole time.

The law of Moses is not God’s Ten Commandments, its all the others laws that were placed besides the ark there as a witness against as it contained all of the curses for breaking God’s covenant the Ten Commandments.

I think it’s time I move on. We have been discussing this for days now and I know I am not going to change my mind, and I think you mind is set in stone too. Meaning it’s not changing, where people get this term from God writing in stone because it’s settled. Psa 89:34 Psa 119:89 Rev 15:5 Rev 11:19

I do really wish you well.

I am reading your posts but you are missing quite a bit and your interpretation is off. The covenant consists of the Ten Commandments and the law inspired and written by Moses. The tablets of stone were stored inside of the Ark while the law of Moses was store beside it. HEB. 9:1 for example tells us that the first covenant (old covenant) had regulations for worship and the sanctuary, These were part of the 613 laws, including the 10 commandments that made up what Paul calls the law.

“Now even the first covenant had regulations for divine worship and the earthly sanctuary.”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭9‬:‭1‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

Hebrews 9:1 Now even the first covenant had regulations for divine worship and the earthly sanctuary. | New American Standard Bible - NASB (NASB2020) | Download The Bible App Now

Now even the first covenant had regulations for divine worship and the earthly sanctuary.

bible.com

Your interpretation is off. Jesus came to fulfill the law which is the old covenant. Jesus completed (fulfilled) the terms of the old contract. He did not destroyed the contract but merely finished it. Jesus was the only one that could fulfill (complete the terms)of the old contract perfectly. No one else could. Because the old contract was finished (fulfilled) Jesus then introduced a new contract of which the terms are listed in the New Testament. Hope this helps.