Search results

Sabertooth: If you like to point out some scriptural passages that you believe teach that we no longer have to obey the kosher laws, we can then present to you a Messianic interpretation of the passage. stone: Heh! Yeah, tell me about it. ;)

Where'd you read that?

Personally, I see so many similarities between Hebrews and the Pauline epistles that I am personally convinced Hebrews was written by Paul. The difference, I think, between Hebrews and the Pauline epistles is that Hebrews was written as a sermon, while Paul's other writings were informal letters.

Sounds like a similar fate of one who has Judah on one side, and Ephraim on the other.

Visionary: Thank you, I hope it was helpful. :)

The above comments seem contradictory to me. I, too, would like an explanation as to why this topic is not permitted here. Is this a consensus ruling by the forum administration, or the personal agenda of a single moderator?

continued... Paul here uses Kal V'chomer (the first rule of Hillel) to show that the blood of Messiah offered through his Melchizedek Priesthood is at least as purifying as that of the purification sacrifices of the Aaronic Priesthood. The New Covenant is to be made with "The House of...

Shimson: Now that the context from Chapter 8 has been established, we can better understand Chapter 9: This indicates that it was the Day of Atonement, as it is only on this day that the golden altar of incense is placed within the veil: Paul mentions the items inside the Temple...

Is there a way to PM all of the moderators together, in order to get a consensus opinion, or do I have to PM each moderator individually?

continued... The word “covenant” does not appear in the original text, it was added by the translators. The contrast is between the Aaronic Priesthood and the Priesthood of Melchizedek. In other words, the contrast is between the first “ministry” (service in the Tabernacle/Temple) and...

shimson: [/color] Page back to Chapter 8 for context: In this section, Paul ties the ideas of Psalms. 110:1 and 110:4 together. [/size] [size=3] The Priest in the Holy of Holies implies the Day of Atonement (the only time the High Priest ever enters the Holy of Holies)...

global nomad: [/i] Okay, let’s take a closer look at the chapter and see what Paul is discussing: Since Paul is the only apostle who ever used the term “Old Covenant,” and even *he* only used it once (in 2 Corinthians 3:14), equating the term “Old Covenant” with the Mosaic Covenant is...

[/color][/size][/font] Take a look at Jeremiah 31:31-34: The difference between the "Old Covenant" and the "New Covenant" isn't a difference in the commandments that are to be obeyed, but a difference in the condition of the heart which obeys those commandments. The "New Covenant" is the...

[/color][/size][/font] I think the error here is in the assumption that the "Old Covenant" to which Paul is referring is the Mosaic Covenant. It isn't. The term "Old Covenant" refers to one who reads the Tanakh and does not see the Messiah to Whom it points. Just like the veil over Moses'...

I can't answer your question without discussing the Two House doctrine which I've been informed is not allowed here (although I can't see how it violates any of the posted rules of the forum). Evidently, doctrinal differences are not allowed here, and contrary to the claims of this forum...

I couldn't disagree more. The internet is perhaps the best place for debate and discussion. It's the reason for its existence: the exchange of information. What better way exists for us to debate and discuss theological beliefs with such a diverse group of people from all parts of the world...

I would offer a response, but unfortunately, only those doctrinal positions held by the moderators of this forum are permitted here: [/color][/font]

I think people need to realize that one's opinion of a particular religious doctrine does not equate to an opinion about the person who holds that doctrine. For instance, Yeshua hated the doctrines of the Pharisees and Nicolaitans, but that doesn't mean He hated the people known as Pharisees...

In this passage, as in all passages of scripture, context is key. You cannot strip out verse 5 and make a doctrinal statement out of it alone, you must consider the verse within its context. Verse 1 lays down the context of the chapter.

Yes, it does. Back up to verse one for context: According to the "custom of Moses" is 1st-century terminology for the "Oral Law." The first and most obvious issue here is that the Judaizers were claiming that circumcision is a requirement for salvation. In doing so, they were making...