Commandments Question

Bible Highlighter said:

Then why was the temple veil torn from top to bottom (Which was a sign of the ending of the priesthood and it's animal sacrifices) when Christ died?

Why did Christ say that the cup of the wine they were drinking at the last supper was representative of His blood which was shed for the New Testament?

Why does Hebrews say that a testament is not in force until the testator dies?

Click to expand...

Everything refers to the Kingdom. And no need for a veil to separate fleshy world of man and God, when we have a personal go between who is both God and flesh.

klutedavid said:

But Abraham was reckoned righteous because he believed God. That was before the letter of the law ever existed. This is one of Paul's points in the letter to the Romans.

Click to expand...

Yet the will of God existed right back to the Garden. The law was just another form of it.

timothyu said:

Yet the will of God existed right back to the Garden. The law was just another form of it.

Click to expand...

The purpose of the law was to increase sin. That's what the law does it increases disobedience.

God gave Israel the law so they would become utterly disobedient. Hence where sin increased the grace of God towards Israel also increased.

The end result of this increasing grace was fully manifested in Jesus Christ.

klutedavid said:

The purpose of the law was to increase sin. That's what the law does it increases disobedience.

Click to expand...

I don't know about that, but the will of God makes the will of man stand out by comparison under the light of scrutiny. As a result we are left to chose for ourselves which is the more passive and productive as a way of life and governance. (self serving or servitude)

Bible Highlighter said:

The New Covenant did not officially begin until Christ died upon the cross. But before that time, Christ was teaching primarily New Covenant and not Old Covenant because He was making many changes to the Old Law with His New Covenant teachings. I say "primarily" that Christ was teaching NT because Jesus told a man to offer a sacrifice after he first reconciled with his brother (See Matthew 5:24). Offering animal sacrifices is clearly an Old Covenant practice that has no more place in the New Covenant because Jesus is now our Passover Lamb or sacrifice.

Click to expand...

just my understanding I think the New Covenant began in the Garden. great to be able to seek these things. Truly take on His yoke and learn of him. One of the things I found out that really touches my heart is when we are told about putting our crown at His feet. The rabbi's believed that their students seated before them were there crown a crown made up of living stones? I wonder if maybe Rabbi Shaul /Paul was thinking of when the Holy Spirit was using him you write so much New Testament's books? Wonder who you have added to your crown. God bless and good night

timothyu said:

I don't know about that, but the will of God makes the will of man stand out by comparison under the light of scrutiny. As a result we are left to chose for ourselves which is the more passive and productive as a way of life and governance. (self serving or servitude)

Click to expand...

Spend a lot of time reading the letter to the Romans and you will understand the role of the law. Cherry pick verses from Romans and you will not understand what Paul is saying.

Become an expert on the letter to the Romans.

klutedavid said:

Spend a lot of time reading the letter to the Romans and you will understand the role of the law. Cherry pick verses from Romans and you will not understand what Paul is saying.

Click to expand...

Jesus' entire Gospel of the Kingdom was about the law/will of God versus the will of man. Paul's teachings were built upon the Gospel of the Kingdom. The law is clearly the will of God no matter what name it was given through the ages and it's role clear as a contrast to the will of rebellious self serving man.

Bible Highlighter said:

Try re-reading Acts of the Apostles 15:1, Acts of the Apostles 15:5, and Acts of the Apostles 15:24 very carefully.

Click to expand...

These verses aren't about the alleged Ebionites. Ebionite is Greek for "poor ones"; neither the Pharisees nor Saducees were poor. Both had the full support of the people and institution. That is why they had the audacity to tell other people what would and wouldn't send them to hell.

Yeshua HaDerekh said:

What you are talking about is Rabbinic Halakha/Gezeirot/Takkanot. These are non-Torah Rabbinic hedges/fences around the original law as to try and not break it.

Click to expand...

I read sections of Talmud Bavli and Talmud Yerushalmi in English. I remember Rabbi Hillel and Rabbi Shammai. Tractate Mikvaot seemed bad to me. Part of it is about a woman and her seven days of uncleanness associated with her monthly period (Leviticus 15:19), as if she was quarantined for seven days.

fwGod said:

Oh yes it includes the Sunday morning. The Jewish day begins at evening and continues to the following evening. So between the evenings is the morning and throughout the day.

Click to expand...

Jewish day? You mean biblical day? The days God created? See, you (like all of us) have a bias you see through... and something so clearly obvious, escapes you (and most of Christianity). Show me a verse that says, "Jewish day" and you win the point. You can't, we both know it. There is no Jewish day, there are the days God created and they begin and end at sundown.

fwGod said:

You have provided yourself a lie just so you can deny that the first century believers went to worship God on Sunday.

Click to expand...

I told you that I can prove what happened in the first century in terms of the keeping of Sunday. It involves a MINORITY of Jews, the fast of the firstborn, and the resurrection of messiah. Then, the keeping of that day remained a minority until after the Bar Khokba revolt in 132AD. It wasn't until around 150, for reasons I won't share right now because you are clearly not interested in considering anything that doesn't mesh with your current view... that Sunday became the majority practice. I can then roll forward in history and show where Roman Christians, who had kept SUNday because of their religious worship prior to conversion, decreed that Christians are not to keep Saturday like the Jews. That alone is an interesting thing because it means that in the early 300's enough Christians still WERE keeping Saturday that it required a decree.

fwGod said:

I disagree. The book of Hebrews and other epistles of Paul states that any one can enter into God's rest on any day of the week.

Click to expand...

The rest being spoken of was the Millennial Kingdom and Hebrews 4:9 says, if you can read the Greek, that "there remains a Sabbath keeping for the people of God." And in the next verses likens that day to God resting from His works which means both verses 9 and 10 are talking about the 7th day. It is very plain and clear unless you are reading a version that translates sabbatismos (a word that Thayer and Liddel-Scott define first as "keeping Sabbath") as "rest" rather than Sabbath keeping which is what the word means. And before you fire back saying I am making words say what I want or need them to say know 2 things. 1.... I didn't write the Thayer or the Liddel-Scott lexicons, the latter of which is considered to Greek what Gesenius is to Hebrew. 2... I don't CARE what the outcome is, I just seek whatever God's truth is. I wasn't raised a Christian, I didn't come into this with a bias. At 29 I became a Baptist, and I studied hard for years and eventually got frustrated of not having answers for some things. I might not have all the answers now, but I can certainly answer more than I was able to. I asked you earlier... is there a verse that says "Jewish day?" Even though the answer is no... you won't change your view on this right now... and will only keep using that phrase even though God never once used it.

fwGod said:

The apostle Paul stated in 2 Tim.3:16 that all scriptures are God breathed. In Hebrews 1 it states that in the OT God spoke through Moses and the prophets but that now in the NT God speaks through His Son.

Click to expand...

If you were able to go back in time and ask Paul what "Scripture" was, his answer would NOT have been his own letters. Even though we know he was inspired to write and his letters belong in the bible... at that time, he was writing letters to certain churches to cover issues going on in that day. He would have said the Torah, the Prophets, and the Psalms were "Scripture" as would ANY Jewish Christian in that day. Yes, Peter wrote in such a way that one might take it as if he was saying Paul was writing Scripture. But, words have more than one meaning. The Greek "graphe" simple means, "that which is written." It doesn't mean "holy writ" and CAN MEAN "holy writ" or it could be the Greek play in writing that Paul quoted twice. Peter was simply saying that the unlearned confuse Paul like they do other writings.... Scripture, what was found in the Dead Sea caves... and more. Bottom line, Paul wrote to the church in Corinth to deal with issues going on there. He didn't send it and think to himself, "Dang that was good... that belongs right next to Deuteronomy!" That, to Paul... a rabbi and a Pharisee (Acts 23:6 and notice it's in present tense not past) he would NOT have considered his own writings "the bible."

Therefore, 2 Tim 3:16 is saying that we can use the Torah and Prophets for learning, correcting, instructing, etc. We NOW KNOW we can use all the NT too... but at that time, there was no NT... Paul was referencing the Torah and Prophets.

fwGod said:

So. When Paul wrote that food is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer. He was referring to when Jesus became the Word of God and dwelt among us. As well as the inspired revelations that Paul received to share with the believers. Because the OT times didn't have that grace working where they could just eat non-kosher food as long as it was prayed over by scriptures in the Tanach.

Click to expand...

You tried to use that verse to show that today you can eat bottom dwelling poop eating fish that weren't created as food and now you are saying it was talking about the word made flesh and what(?) now we can eat him? Is this a verse to support the Eucharist?

And as far as grace is concerned... first of all, God doesn't change. If He was a God of law then, He is now. If He is a God of grace now, He was then. Are you seriously going to say that Joseph going through all he did, ultimately to save the people who put him in Egypt in the first place isn't unmerited favor? Are you seriously going to say that Adam being removed from being able to access the tree of life in a fallen state isn't an act of grace? Look, the Hebrew word for grace appears FAR MORE in the OT than the Greek word for grace appears in the NT. That is a fact... the problem is, again... you are reading through a bias that doesn't allow you to see this. God doesn't change, grace is all throughout the OT and yet you don't see it and claim grace is a NT invention. That isn't consistent with Scripture nor God's character.

fwGod said:

It doesn't state that they aren't for us today. The Sabbath and the new moon is involved in the Jewish feasts that will never be done away with.

Click to expand...

One time, in the NT, Passover is called "a feast of the Jews." That was because, at that time, the only people keeping the feasts were Jews. Beyond that, the bible doesn't call them "Jewish feasts." Do you know what it calls them? Sabbath? Passover? These are "MY FEASTS" according to God Himself. He also calls them, "Feasts of the LORD." (both in Lev. 23:2). So, God says they are "my feasts" and you somewhat mock them and declare them to be Jewish feasts. Who is correct, you... or the God who called them "my feasts?"

fwGod said:

ItHowever, it states that no one is to judge anyone as to whether they are observed in the same way of the NT dispensation as they were in the OT.

Click to expand...

I am not judging you, as told you before to do as you feel convicted, it is between you and God. I don't see an issue with gathering on Sunday as well. But it isn't the Sabbath and only tradition and the paradigm we are born into support a Sunday shift. Romans 14:1-6 isn't talking about the feasts, they weren't optional, they are annual appointments with God. Paul was talking about Purim, Hanukkah, and other days set apart by people to honor God. If you want to do them, do them unto the Lord. If you don't, don't. Some people set apart their baptism day, and they do so unto the Lord... it is between THEM and the Lord. What we are not to do, according to Paul, is make others have to follow our personal convictions... no "doubtful disputations" is what he said.

fwGod said:

ItTherefore, worshipping only on Sabbath-Friday & Saturday is giving way to the grace of the NT observance on Sunday when Jesus rose from the dead.

Click to expand...

The word for worship means "to bow, to bend the knee, to prostrate oneself." We do this only before the one we are SUBMITTED to, our Lord. Therefore, ALL WE DO out of submission is part of worship... including just being obedient daily. But that aside, I didn't say and don't believe that "worship" as you are defining the word is only for one day... it SHOULD be all days. What I said was, the day of rest has not changed. There is no verse that moves the day of rest.

fwGod said:

ItWe live under a better covenant than they did. So why should any of us seek to do it exactly as they did in the OT?

Click to expand...

I really can't address this with you now... you won't receive it. I don't mean that.. mean... I just know you won't receive it. I will say this much.... where was the law written in the covenant at Sinai? Stone. Where is it being written in the covenant made through Jesus' blood? The heart. God (Ezekiel 11:19 and others) is simply taking what was on stone and writing it on the heart. That is better... why? Because when it was written on stone, His people were commanded to keep it on their own hearts (Deut. 6:6) but they failed. So, now God is doing for us, what we could not do... write on our hearts in such a way that it will always remain there. That is what is better. But listen... there is not two laws here... the law was written on stone, and now the law is written on the heart. Same law.

fwGod said:

ItConcerning the Galatians who sought to do that, the apostle Paul told them they forsake grace when they try to keep themselves according to the OT.

Click to expand...

The Jews were living in Galatia at that time? No... those were ex-pagans.

Gal 4:8 But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods.
Gal 4:9 But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God, how is it that you turn again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage?
Gal 4:10 You observe days and months and seasons and years.

So the Galatians were Jews trying to keep the OT law or were they pagans who were serving those who by their nature were not gods... false gods? (vs. 8) And when did the Jews not know who God was, or when did God not know the Jews? Paul wrote that the Jews were entrusted to preserve the Word of God and these people in this book didn't even know who God was nor were known by God (vs. 9). So the day, months, seasons and years were not the things God created and called "good" like Passover, Tabernacles, or the Sabbath... these were feasts like Saturnalia or the weekly veneration of the SUN done every SUNday.

fwGod said:

We are not part of Israel. We are the Body of Christ.

Click to expand...

The body of Christ is Israel. Not only is ONLY Israel mentioned in the new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31 Hebrews 8:8) but there is only gates for Israel in the New Jerusalem, there is no 13th gate marked for gentiles (pagans). And then there is this, which you ignored the first time I referenced it...

Eph 2:11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh--who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands--
Eph 2:12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

Once gentiles in the flesh, without Christ, an alien of the Commonwealth of Israel, a stranger to the covenant of promise and without hope is NOW drawn near by the blood of Christ and what?

Eph 2:19 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God

Fellow CITIZENS? Once aliens of the Commonwealth of Israel and NOW fellow citizens.

fwGod said:

You are seeking for a definite verse that would tell you word for word to worship on Sunday. I see the example of the NT body of believers that did it. They were Jews, who taught the Gentiles by example. So how can you, a Gentile, be more right than they are?

Click to expand...

Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. If we don't have the Word of God telling us walk away from something God set up at creation for all of humankind (there were no "Jews" at creation, if Adam was, we are all Jews) and start keeping another day, then why do we do it? We don't have direction from God to change the Sabbath.... so that is man changing the Sabbath. It really is that simple... you will see it at some point.

Going on like this isn't fruitful, I most likely won't reply back unless it becomes more a give and take rather than whatever this is.

Be blessed.
Ken

fwGod said:

I have. It unfortunately made it a large post. This is extra padding that is not the topic of worship on Saturday versus Sunday.

Click to expand...

No... your claim is the law was done away with by the work of Christ. Since "do not steal" or "do not lay with a man as you would a woman" are OT law... then are they now permissible? We are warned about lawlessness in the latter times. That isn't US secular law, that is God's law we are being warned about. A law He gave and called everlasting. That means without end. If our theology doesn't stand in harmony with the law being without end, then the problem is with us.

Like I said... there isn't a need to continue. I once made the same exact arguments you are making. But, at some point you will have to deal with the unanswerable questions. When you do, look me up.

Be blessed.
Ken

fwGod said:

I have. It unfortunately made it a large post.

Click to expand...

Last note... HERE is an article I had posted in the Times of Israel a few years ago. You don't need to read it all, you don't need to read any of it. But if you want a little first century history that the church doesn't teach... scroll down to the section that says, "When Did Christianity Stop Looking So Jewish?" If read to hear and not to find things to argue about, I would imagine you'll enjoy it even if you don't agree with it.

Blessings.
Ken

Ken Rank said:

That alone is an interesting thing because it means that in the early 300's enough Christians still WERE keeping Saturday that it required a decree.

Click to expand...

The result of the final purge of outward Jewish influence from what was now a gentile religion?

Ken Rank said:

o... your claim is the law was done away with by the work of Christ. ......We are warned about lawlessness in the latter times.

Click to expand...

I agree. How could the will of God portrayed at one point as Laws be done away with? His will has been the same from beginning to end. It's in the Lord's Prayer. Who other than the Adversary would it benefit anyone doing away with the will of God, or calling it new even though it is the same as the old? Is that not why it is portrayed as a falling away in the latter days, lawlessness? That, being man's will over the will of God, brought to a new extreme if that were even possible compared to what we have already seen throughout history.

Bible Highlighter said:

The New Covenant did not officially begin until Christ died upon the cross. But before that time, Christ was teaching primarily New Covenant and not Old Covenant because He was making many changes to the Old Law with His New Covenant teachings. I say "primarily" that Christ was teaching NT because Jesus told a man to offer a sacrifice after he first reconciled with his brother (See Matthew 5:24). Offering animal sacrifices is clearly an Old Covenant practice that has no more place in the New Covenant because Jesus is now our Passover Lamb or sacrifice.

Click to expand...

The covenants are not a series of covenants each dovetailing in the previous or following covenant. The Covenant we know as the Mosaic Covenant is not and cannot be combined with the Covenant given to Abraham. Who says they cannot be combined? God! The covenant given to Abraham was duly established with the shedding of blood was and is like all the covenants except the Mosaic Covenant fulfilled by the Lord's work alone not a combination of our work and His work. Abraham went into what looked like death and the Lord alone went between the sacrifices to meet the demands of the covenant. Only the Mosaic Covenant has "do this and live" attached to it. All the others covenants have what we believe, 'Believe," The difference between Mosaic is "Do" on our part or "Done" on His part. Do and it is up to us to finish our salvation or done and it has been finished by the Lord. The difference between the Mosaic and other religions is slight because all religions are do and do, do and do. There is only one Christian religion and it is not only done by Christ It is Finished. All we can do is believe.

Bible Highlighter said:

Wow. Double trouble. Jesus did not obey the Law?
We are still under the Old Law? Is that what you are saying?

Click to expand...

Of course He did. You said ALL. He never kept ALL of it, He couldn't, no one can. Why won't you answer my question?

klutedavid said:

Paul actually says the opposite.

Click to expand...

Non-sequitur, besides also no he doesn't.

Vicky gould said:

The covenants are not a series of covenants each dovetailing in the previous or following covenant. The Covenant we know as the Mosaic Covenant is not and cannot be combined with the Covenant given to Abraham. Who says they cannot be combined? God! The covenant given to Abraham was duly established with the shedding of blood was and is like all the covenants except the Mosaic Covenant fulfilled by the Lord's work alone not a combination of our work and His work. Abraham went into what looked like death and the Lord alone went between the sacrifices to meet the demands of the covenant. Only the Mosaic Covenant has "do this and live" attached to it. All the others covenants have what we believe, 'Believe," The difference between Mosaic is "Do" on our part or "Done" on His part. Do and it is up to us to finish our salvation or done and it has been finished by the Lord. The difference between the Mosaic and other religions is slight because all religions are do and do, do and do. There is only one Christian religion and it is not only done by Christ It is Finished. All we can do is believe.

Click to expand...

There are only two major Covenants (or Testaments) (i.e. the Old Testament, and the New Testament).

"For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second." (Hebrews 8:7).

The New Covenant (or New Testament) officially began with Christ's death upon the cross.

For the temple veil was torn top to bottom letting us know that the laws on the priesthood and the sacrifices had ended (See: Matthew 27:50-51).

Jesus said that the wine in the cup at the Lord's supper represented His blood that was shed for the New Testament (See: Matthew 26:27-28).

Hebrews 9:16-17 says,

"For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth."

In other words, Jesus had to die in order for the New Testament (or New Covenant) to go into effect. Like a will that is written by a family member in the event that they die so that way they can give their loved ones the benefit of their inheritance.

But before the New Covenant officially went into effect, Jesus was making changes to the Law. This is not opinion but pure fact from the Scriptures themselves.

Jesus clearly was making changes to the Law (even before the cross):
(Which means He was not teaching primarily Old Covenant, but New Covenant):

The Old Way says:
"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth"
(Matthew 5:38 cf. Exodus 21:23-25).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matthew 5:39).


The Old Way says:
"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment" (Matthew 5:21 cf. Numbers 35:30-32).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (Matthew 5:22).


The Old Way says:
"Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:" (Matthew 5:34 cf. Numbers 30:1-2, Deuteronomy 23:21).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
34 "But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:
35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.
37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." (Matthew 5:34-37).


The Old Way says:
"And of thy mercy cut off mine enemies, and destroy all them that afflict my soul: for I am thy servant." (Psalms 143:12).

"And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are therein, to the LORD: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent." (Joshua 6:17).

"And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword." (Joshua 6:21).

16 "But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:
17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee" (Deuteronomy 20:16-17).

"They did not destroy the nations, concerning whom the LORD commanded them" (Psalms 106:34).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;" (Matthew 5:44).

Note: Yes, I am aware that the Old Way (Old Testament) also teaches to love one's enemies (Exodus 23:4-5) (Proverbs 25:21), but this was in context to their own Israelite people, and not pagan nations. Pagan nations were to be destroyed when God commanded the Israelites to destroy them. But Jesus taught a radically different way. Love your enemies, and do good to them that hate you, and to pray for those who persecute you.


The Old Way says:
20 "But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:
21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the harlot in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel." (Deuteronomy 22:20-22).

4 "They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?" (John 8:4-5).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
"He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. " (John 8:7).


Even after the cross, there were changes being made:

The Old Covenant says this about circumcision:
"And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." (Genesis 17:14).

Yet, the New Covenant says this about circumcision:
"Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing."
(Galatians 5:2).


The Old Covenant says this about the Sabbath:
32 "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.
33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.
35 And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses." (Numbers 15:32-36).

Yet, the New Covenant says this about the Sabbath:
"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:" (Colossians 2:16).

So it appears things have changed.

This makes sense because again, Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed.

"For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law."
(Hebrews 7:12).

“For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.”
(John 1:17).

Jesus said,
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." (Matthew 5:17).

Jesus came not to abolish the Law (in the sense of destroying all forms of Law), but Jesus came to fulfill the Law (i.e. to nail to the cross those ordinances that were against us [like the Old Covenant ceremonial laws], and Jesus came to give us a more fulfilled and perfect way of obeying God via the commands that come directly from Him and His followers). For Jesus offered a more perfect way of loving God, and loving our neighbor (Which of course is only possible via if we are first saved by God's grace through faith).

Bible Highlighter said:

There are only two major Covenants (or Testaments) (i.e. the Old Testament, and the New Testament).

"For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second." (Hebrews 8:7).

The New Covenant (or New Testament) officially began with Christ's death upon the cross.

For the temple veil was torn top to bottom letting us know that the laws on the priesthood and the sacrifices had ended (See: Matthew 27:50-51).

Jesus said that the wine in the cup at the Lord's supper represented His blood that was shed for the New Testament (See: Matthew 26:27-28).

Hebrews 9:16-17 says,

"For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth."

In other words, Jesus had to die in order for the New Testament (or New Covenant) to go into effect. Like a will that is written by a family member in the event that they die so that way they can give their loved ones the benefit of their inheritance.

But before the New Covenant officially went into effect, Jesus was making changes to the Law. This is not opinion but pure fact from the Scriptures themselves.

Jesus clearly was making changes to the Law (even before the cross):
(Which means He was not teaching primarily Old Covenant, but New Covenant):

The Old Way says:
"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth"
(Matthew 5:38 cf. Exodus 21:23-25).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." (Matthew 5:39).


The Old Way says:
"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment" (Matthew 5:21 cf. Numbers 35:30-32).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." (Matthew 5:22).


The Old Way says:
"Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:" (Matthew 5:34 cf. Numbers 30:1-2, Deuteronomy 23:21).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
34 "But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:
35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.
37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." (Matthew 5:34-37).


The Old Way says:
"And of thy mercy cut off mine enemies, and destroy all them that afflict my soul: for I am thy servant." (Psalms 143:12).

"And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are therein, to the LORD: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent." (Joshua 6:17).

"And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword." (Joshua 6:21).

16 "But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:
17 But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee" (Deuteronomy 20:16-17).

"They did not destroy the nations, concerning whom the LORD commanded them" (Psalms 106:34).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;" (Matthew 5:44).

Note: Yes, I am aware that the Old Way (Old Testament) also teaches to love one's enemies (Exodus 23:4-5) (Proverbs 25:21), but this was in context to their own Israelite people, and not pagan nations. Pagan nations were to be destroyed when God commanded the Israelites to destroy them. But Jesus taught a radically different way. Love your enemies, and do good to them that hate you, and to pray for those who persecute you.


The Old Way says:
20 "But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:
21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the harlot in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel." (Deuteronomy 22:20-22).

4 "They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?" (John 8:4-5).

The New Way (by Jesus) says:
"He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. " (John 8:7).


Even after the cross, there were changes being made:

The Old Covenant says this about circumcision:
"And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." (Genesis 17:14).

Yet, the New Covenant says this about circumcision:
"Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing."
(Galatians 5:2).


The Old Covenant says this about the Sabbath:
32 "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.
33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.
35 And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses." (Numbers 15:32-36).

Yet, the New Covenant says this about the Sabbath:
"Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:" (Colossians 2:16).

So it appears things have changed.

This makes sense because again, Hebrews 7:12 says the Law has changed.

"For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law."
(Hebrews 7:12).

“For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.”
(John 1:17).

Jesus said,
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." (Matthew 5:17).

Jesus came not to abolish the Law (in the sense of destroying all forms of Law), but Jesus came to fulfill the Law (i.e. to nail to the cross those ordinances that were against us [like the Old Covenant ceremonial laws], and Jesus came to give us a more fulfilled and perfect way of obeying God via the commands that come directly from Him and His followers). For Jesus offered a more perfect way of loving God, and loving our neighbor (Which of course is only possible via if we are first saved by God's grace through faith).

Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying but clearly there are more than Just the Old and New Covenants. The Old and the New do not speak of separate covenants the new is the more advanced version of the covenant given to Abraham which was the more advanced revelation of the covenant given in the Garden? Only the Mosaic Covenant is dependent upon God and man for its fulfillment. the way believers are to live and the power needed to live a Holy Life is found in Titus 2: 11- 15. If it were not all Paul would need say is the Mosaic Covenant do that. Romans 7 we must be dead to our Husband the Law. Why? Because the Law prevents us from living for God and even more than that We cannot be the Bride of Christ. If you are still wed to the Law then you are asking the Lord to commit adultery by wedding you and your husband the Law. I believe the Lord has said He is against Adultery how could the Lord then be an adulterer Himself. Our God is a jealous God and if you are trying to have both husbands the Law and the Christ you have got His jealousy working over time to free yourself from the Law through the death of Christ.

Scripture tells us God designed His Law, written, to put us to death to the Law through the Law. Listen to that we were put to death to the Law by the Law. If this is God's design what does it say if we seek to overcome or undermine our death to the Law? Is that His Will? If it were He never would have designed the Law to accomplish the things in believers relationship to the Law just as those things that are only for the believer not the nonbeliever. Are you the Righteous or the unrighteous? Of course we are the righteous but what the Law says it speaks only to the unrighteous. There can be is no condemnation for Believers who are in Christ Jesus and for their to be no condemnation their can be no Law. Wherever Law is their is condemnation, must be condemnation and wrath, and wrath or the Law is not being used correctly. If we misuse the Law it is sin all men can do is use the Law wrongly. This truth does not stop because we become believers.

Thanks Lord for providing others to test our belief on knowing that Your Holy Spirit wants nothing more for all us to see the Light of the World your Holy and righteous Son, our Lord, Savior and Husband. Amen

timothyu said:

The result of the final purge of outward Jewish influence from what was now a gentile religion?

Click to expand...

Words evolve over time and the word "gentile" is one of my favorite examples of how word evolution has actually hindered our understanding and created a false bias. Please, allow me to explain...

In the 1828 Webster's, which standardized the English language by giving set definitions for words especially as understood in Scripture at that time, the word gentile meant... "A pagan, a heathen, anyone who is not Jewish or Christian."

According to the modern Webster's, gentile is defined as, "a person of a non-Jewish nation or of non-Jewish faith - especially : a Christian as distinguished from a Jew."

Look again... when the first English bibles were translated, the Hebrew goyim and the Greek ethnos were translated as gentile which meant a pagan, or anyone who wasn't a Jew or Christian. But TODAY that word means, "anyone who isn't a Jew."

So is there a pagan religion that serves the God of Israel? No... because we cease being pagans when we come in faith to His family.

Yeshua was Jewish... and he kept the Sabbath, the Feasts, ate cleanly and so forth. He was the model we are to follow. Instead of following Him and doing as He did, the things He did are the fodder for jokes and bad theology. I find that sad, but as I said many times... do whatever it is you are convicted of. But for me, following the Lord means following the Lord... doing as He did as best I can. And when I fail He stands as advocate AND I learn from my mistakes.

Blessings.
Ken