Continued from before....
Originally Posted by talmidim
These are everlasting covenants declared and ratified by the Most High. The same can be said of Torah; requirement are everlasting, such as for the qualifications of the priesthood and the existence of the Temple as it relates to the mitzvahs of sacrifice. If those conditions change, the requirements are still in force. Sacrifice will again be required, even
after the atoning sacrifice of Y'shua.
As it concerns the sacrifices, again, it seems logical to realize that they must be done in a memorial sense when considering how there's no more need for Levitical sacrifices for the sake of sin since the Messiah's atonement takes care of that...just as Hebrews 7-10 discusses in graphic detail on the better covenant/the Blood and Sacrifice of Messiah being vastly superior to the Levitical one for dealing with sin.
It should be noted that the millennium will be a time in which Israel’s New Covenant will become the ruling jurisdiction (Deuteronomy 29:4; 30:6; Isaiah 59:20-21; 61:8-9; Jeremiah 31:31-40; 32:37-40; 50:4-5; Ezekiel 11:19-20; 16:60-63; 34:25-26; 36:24-32; 37:21-28; Zechariah 9:11; 12:10-14). Therefore, it will not be a time of returning to the old but of going forward to the new. “For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also” (Hebrews 7:12). The new millennial law will contain a mixture of Mosaic-type laws with totally new non-Mosaic laws not found in the 613, under the jurisdiction of the New Covenant. Jesus the Messiah will be physically present instead of the Shechinah glory presence in conjunction with the ark of the covenant; a new priestly order from the sons of Zadok (Ezekiel 40:46; 43:19; 48:11) instead of the Levites...and there will be a new temple measuring one mile square (Ezekiel 40:48-41:26) instead of the much smaller Solomonic model
As Hebrews 7:11 makes clear, perfection involves effective FORGIVENESS of sin. One can also go to Hebrews 9:14 and Hebrews 10:14 or Hebrews 10:17-18. For there is a spiritual aspect to Christ's sacrifice, which stands in CONTRAST to the Jewish temple sacrifices. The significance of that spiritual aspect becomes clear in Hebrews 10:5-10...for Human conscience is the inner sanctuary where Christ's atoning sacrifice has its effect. One can see Hebrews 8:10 for more. For similar affirmations on the cleansing effect of Christ's death, one can see Acts 15:9 and Ephesians 5:26 as well as Titus 2:14 and I Peter 3:21 and I John 1:7-9. Hebrews 10:1-5 make clear that the LAW was UNABLE TO MAKE PERFECT, regardless of all of the sacririces of bulls and goats....and what the bulls and goats represented was the eventual sacrifice of Christ, which would bring perfection. Once that happened, there would be NO MORE NEED for sacrificing bulls/goats unless it was done in a memorial sense.
In many ways, it's all akin to a "transfer" (the equivalent of a replacement. Its no more different than one saying that they've transferred power from one previous system to another...or transfering files from one computer (which is older/unable to perform certain functions) into an updated computer that is highly advanced. For a person to sit there/claim "Well that doesn't mean the old system is replaced" would be foolish since the context determines the meaning of the word.
Hebrews 8:4 is another scripture to consider. For the scriptures make clear that there was a HEAVENLY counterpart to the earthly sanctuary----as Revelation 3:12, Revelation 7:15, Revelation 11:19, Revelation 14:15, and Revelation 15:5 all make clear. Some may say that the destruction for the temple was the catalyst for the Heavenly sanctuary to remain---but there's nothing remotely within the text about the destruction of the temple being such. For the earthly one remained in place in the sense of living out its days once the CURTAIN was torn ( Matthew 27:50-54 , Mark 15:37-39, Luke 23:44-46 ). That curtain that was torn was the veil that hung at the entrance of the "most holy place" of the temple (Exodus 26:31-35), where the Divine prescence dwelt. For it to be torn in two symbolizes access to God---just as Hebrews 9:1-14 and Hebrews 10:19-22 make clear. Even if others wished to participate in the life of the earthly temple, the reality is that the prescence that dwelt there had LONG since left...and the expiration date was coming to. It was already destroyed, with what occurred in A.D 70 simply being a confirmation of what was already the case.
The veil being torn would've easily forshadowed the destruction of the temple, symbolizing the rending of the barrier between Humanity and God....just as Hebrews 12:18-29 indicate alongside Hebrews 10:19-20 when it mentions how the death of Jesus has made access to God possible for ALL humanity.
Hebrews 8:8-12 also make a difference, as it concerns the citation of Jeremiah 31:31-34. Jeremiah envisioned a renewal of the Sinai covenant, but the authors of Hebrews envisioned its replacement....and as Hebrews 8:7 makes plain, "For if the first covenant had been FAUTLESS, there would have been no need to look for a second one."
You don't see how the seven Seals of the Revelation line up with the seven covenants that I mentioned. I can understand that. But I assure you that they do. I can show you how they also thematically align with the seven Appointed Times of Adonai and the seven Furnishing of the Tabernacle too. There are more 'sevens' that align with the covenants, most notably and prophetically, the seven days of creations.
......Like I said before, it's a long study. Some of the people in this forum have seen bits and pieces of it. Perhaps I'll share it later.
I can understand why you feel that the Seven Seals of Revelation represent seven covenants--as there were and are others who used to see it as such. Technically, there were were 8 covenants rather than 7--and they don't really line up fully with the text of Revelation. Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum did an excellent review on the subject in one of his articles within the Messianic Jewish series done by Ariel Ministries---entitled
THE EIGHT COVENANTS OF THE BIBLE - Ariel Ministries. The idea of Revelation's Seven Seals representing several covenants is not new, nor has not been addressed before..although there are myriad of ways one can make it make sense..and indeed, they're very interesting. Personally, I'd not fall on my sword/die for defending the viewpoint--but I respec where you stand on it. Indeed, it's a long study that takes alot to hash out on all sides---but perhaps that'd be an excellent idea for a thread to be made
I can understand why you think I am in error considering your perspective.
I don't fault you at all for that.
To be clear, it's actually the perspective of the Mainstream schools of Messianic Judaism--including the MJAA and many other prominent ones as well. Wanted to mention that since it's not as if what I said was just
my view....and other Messianics/Moderators have noted the same as well when it comes to discussions on what Messianic Judaism teaches. If one needs reference for such, one can ask and it'll not be a problem to share
Perhaps I wasn't clear. I believe with all of my heart that the yoke to which Peter referred was the burden Y'shua spoke of:...speaking in this manner of the traditions of the Pharisees - the oral Torah - not the written Torah. More to come later...
What you said here was clear in that it was understood this was what you meant previously--and as said before, it is not what's in agreement with the majority of Mainstream Messianic Judaism---and others within the camp have often spoken out on it when it comes to trying to equate the "yoke" in Acts 15 with traditions of the Law rather than the Law itself on many parts.
The IMJA (International Messianic Jewish Alliance ) has shared alot of thoughts on this subject when it comes to Gentiles being apart of the Messianic Movement and not trying to condemn all Gentiles/Jews who don't agree with saying Gentiles were called to follow all aspects of Jewish customs/Law. For more, one can go to
Gentiles in the Messianic Movement | imja.org
Additionally, MJAA and many of the leaders there (Dan Juster being one of the most prominent) have actually spoken out on the ways that trying to proclaim Gentile obediance to all aspects of the Mosaic Torah is akin to what has happened in the Ephramite Movement where others say Gentiles came into the covenant via Israel/thus are to live fully as them. For more, one can go to
The Ephraimite Error - Messianic Jewish Alliance of America. One of the more prominent leaders of the
Messianic Jewish Alliance of America (MJAA) is of the opinion that ethnic Jewish members of Messianic congregations should keep the entire Torah as much as possible, and should also follow the Rabbinic traditions as long as they do not contradict the written Torah (which they often do). He has stated (in my personal hearing) that he feels Gentile believers in Messiah, whether members of Messianic Jewish congregations or not, are subject only to the Noahic Commandments... inferred from Genesis Ch. 9, and are as follows: 1) to establish courts of justice; 2) not to commit blasphemy; 3) not to commit idolatry; 4) not to commit incest and adultery; 5) not to commit bloodshed; 6) not to commit robbery; and 7) not to eat flesh cut from a living animal. These commandments are fairly simple and straightforward, and most of them are recognized by most of the world as sound moral principles.
As many of the commandments given to the Gentiles in Acts 15 were references within the Torah--as well as existing in the concepts given in Noah's day, it doesn't seem at all to be a matter of the Gentiles being called to walk after Moshe in the Torah He was given.
I think Messianic Rabbi Derek Leman said it best when sharing his own thoughts on what Acts 15 said, as
shared here (as well as
here and
here too):
Peter stands up to speak. God has dealt with him regarding non-Jews already (Acts 10-11). He defends the legitimacy of the uncircumcised followers of Yeshua. Then he says:
Now therefore why do you make trial of God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Yeshua, just as they will. (Acts 15:10-11).
What does Peter mean? Perhaps he meant something like the following:
1. We Jews are not so good at keeping Torah.
2. God, in Yeshua, came to show us that Torah is not the way, but grace is.
3. We Jews should abandon Torah, since grace is what really matters, and we should teach the Gentiles the same.
Anything like this above hypothesis faces some damning problems:
1. James and Paul were in agreement in Acts 21 that Torah and Jewish tradition were vital (Acts 21:21, 24).
2. The issue Peter was speaking to did not concern whether Jews should obey Torah, but whether Gentiles should.
3. The anti-Torah reading of Peter’s words goes beyond what is actually said.
4. No one in 2nd Temple Judaism was a Pelagian (thinking they were saved by their good works–this point has been thoroughly established and is the scholarly consensus).
Thus, I would suggest another reading of Peter’s statement, which keeps the focus on the question at hand, requirements for Gentiles:
1. We Jews have had difficulty keeping the boundary markers of Torah (Sabbath, dietary law, circumcision).
2. How could we get Romans to adopt a lifestyle that even Jews turn away from?
3. How could we win the world to Messiah if we must first get Gentiles to keep the boundary markers of Jewishness?
4. The boundary markers of Israel are not the main point, but the redeeming death of Yeshua.
5. So let’s not burden the Gentiles with a Jewish calling, but assume that following Messiah is sufficient for them.
More was shared by Brother Derek in his article
Types of Messianic Congregations,
Boundaries, MJ, Jews & Gentiles
Shalom and wishing you the best
but you could have stated in the OP that in order to post to this thread you must vote. 
