Covenant and New Covenant theology

[mkgal1]

Thanks for the discussion. It is good for men to have these discussions in my view.

It's good for women as well....considering I am not a man.

 

[mkgal1]

Can you show me the Scriptures which show that God's Laws ended in 70 AD?

No, because "God's Laws" is your term....not the Bible’s.

 

[mkgal1]

As the Christ Himself defined His New Covenant as a change in the manner in which God's LAWS are administered, and transgression of His Laws are atoned for, not a change in God's Law themselves.

The author of Hebrews tells a different story than what's written here. It's through the priesthood that the Law comes. A change in interpreter is a change in Law.

Hebrews 7
11Now if perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on this basis the people received the law), why was there still need for another priest to appear—one in the order of Melchizedek and not in the order of Aaron? 12For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed as well.
​

Jesus referred to the Law as a single unit in Matthew 5:18

 

[Studyman]

Your interpretation missed parts of this Biblical passage you shared:

​

I have often wondered if you even read my posts before you judge them or ignore them. Thank you for confirming my suspicions. You didn't even catch the error in Chapter numbers.

Here is what I Said;

"I am only pointing out Biblical Facts for your consideration. I'm not sure how speaking the truth about how Jesus forgave sins before the modern religious men of HIS time killed HIM, is minimizing HIS Life, or HIS death. It was HIS LIFE that made salvation possible for me, not HIS Death. It was HIS LIFE that made HIS Death special. All men die, because of sin. But Jesus offered HIS Sinless LIFE for me.

He ascended because of the Life HE led.

Rom. 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

You seem to be deflecting again, and not addressing the point of the post you are replying to. "

I didn't realize how right I was.

As for the reason Jesus ascended. Once again I am placed with the decision, do I place my faith and belief in your religious Philosophy? Or do I place my Faith in the Word's of God. I choose Him.

Heb. 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

And again;​

Phil. 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

9 Wherefore (Because of this) God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

And again;

Psalms 45:6 Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.

7 Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, (Because of this) thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

It was the Life of Christ which gave His death value. At least according to the God of the Bible.

 

[mkgal1]

You seem to be deflecting again, and not addressing the point of the post you are replying to. "

I didn't realize how right I was.

As for the reason Jesus ascended. Once again I am placed with the decision, do I place my faith and belief in your religious Philosophy? Or do I place my Faith in the Word's of God. I choose Him.

Deflecting? With respect, Studyman....there's hardly been one point for me to focus on....but, instead, numerous of points are being tossed into this discussion all at once. I'm doing my best to try to respond to what I believe are critical issues (like this, for example).

@Douggg began this thread as a comparison of New Covenant Theology contrasted with Covenant Theology and Dispensationalism. You've brought in a whole other framework. Since it's your own - I'll allow you to name it. What would you like to call it?

 

[mkgal1]

My understanding is you are promoting a religious philosophy that God's 10 Commandments, and many other Laws have became obsolete because the sacrifice of animals have become obsolete.

You base this on the religious philosophy that the Covenant God made with Levi can not be separated from the 10 commandments, or any of God's Laws and Statutes, and Judgments given to Abraham and Abraham's Children.

What I believe isn't based on "religious philosophy" (as if apart from what's written in the Bible) but from almost all the text of the New Testament. The whole New Testament testifies that Christ bought something NEW. Someting described as "turning the world upside down" (Acts 17:6).

Here's one example of what I base my beliefs on:

2 Corinthians 3:6-11
He has enabled us to be ministers of his new covenant. This is a covenant not of written laws, but of the Spirit. The old written covenant ends in death; but under the new covenant, the Spirit gives life.

The old way, with laws etched in stone, led to death, though it began with such glory that the people of Israel could not bear to look at Moses’ face. For his face shone with the glory of God, even though the brightness was already fading away.

Shouldn’t we expect far greater glory under the new way, now that the Holy Spirit is giving life?

If the old way, which brings condemnation, was glorious, how much more glorious is the new way, which makes us right with God!

Indeed, what was once glorious has no glory now in comparison to the glory that surpasses it.

For if what was fading away came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which endures!​

 

[mkgal1]

I have often wondered if you even read my posts before you judge them or ignore them. Thank you for confirming my suspicions. You didn't even catch the error in Chapter numbers.

I'm not going to fact check and proofread everything you share. I was trusting it was correct.

 

[mkgal1]

The Pharisees were rejected because they Transgressed God's Commandments by their own religious traditions. Because Moses gave them the Law, but they didn't keep the law. Because they taught for doctrines the Commandments of Men, and not God. Because they, not God, laid grievous burdens on the shoulders of men. Because they "Omitted" the weightier matters of the Law.

NO ONE but Jesus was able to keep the Law. However......even those that Peter directly said were responsible for Jesus's death were brought into the Church on Pentecost. It's never been about how well a person kept the Law. I believe it was BABerean2 that brought up earlier how poorly David would rate, if the score were being kept on "keeping the Law". David would have been disqualified early on. He committed adultery and had Bathsheba's husband murdered....yet King David's throne is written to be in heaven....and the throne that Jesus took over....so it has to be about something else besides how well a person "kept the Law":

Acts 2
36Therefore let all Israel know with certainty that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ!”

37When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and asked Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”38Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39This promise belongs to you and your children and to all who are far off—to all whom the Lord our God will call to Himself.”40With many other words he testified, and he urged them, “Be saved from this corrupt generation.” 41Those who embraced his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to the believers that day.j​

 

[Studyman]

The author of Hebrews tells a different story than what's written here. It's through the priesthood that the Law comes. A change in interpreter is a change in Law.

WOW, Can you provide scriptures which supports this religious philosophy? I have never heard that God's Laws change depending on who interprets it. This is a pretty big deal, I can't believe I missed the Scriptures which show this doctrine. I am looking forward to you providing the Word's of God which confirm this teaching.

Hebrews 7
11Now if perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on this basis the people received the law), why was there still need for another priest to appear—one in the order of Melchizedek and not in the order of Aaron? 12For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed as well.
​

Again, you are omitting the Hebrew Authors detailed explanation as to what Law changed, and why it was necessary for it to change.

I have already posted these scriptures for your consideration once, but you did not respond to them.

I'm sure you mean well, but it seems important to include what the Spirit of Christ inspired the Hebrews author to write, as to what the Law that changed was, and why it was necessary for this law to change.
​

[QUOTE
Jesus referred to the Law as a single unit in Matthew 5:18 [/QUOTE]

So, forgive me here, but didn't you just say:

"I never posted (or meant) that "Love your neighbor as yourself, and the Law of the Sin Offering can not be separated".

So I would humbly ask you then, which position do you hold? The one you posted then, or the one you post now?

Is the Law of God for Israel.

Lev. 19:17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.

18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

Separate from the Priesthood Law given to Levi?

Lev. 4:25 And the priest (Levites, not Israel) shall take of the blood of the sin offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt offering, and shall pour out his blood at the bottom of the altar of burnt offering.

26 And he shall burn all his fat upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace offerings: and the priest (Levites, not Israel) shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.

Or are these two Laws united and can not be separated as you now say?

Jesus's words ("love your neighbor as yourself") was the New Covenant fulfillment of the Law of Moses. IOW....it was the proper interpretation of God's Law, because Jesus is God (our High Priest and mediator of the greater Covenant). The shadow (Mosaic Law) was vanishing when the reality had come (and completely vanished in 70 AD). For the ancient Israelites:

Here is what Jesus actually said;

Matt. 22:36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law? (That you are preaching is become obsolete)

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Now "many" who call Jesus their Lord, preach that these two greatest Laws are only valid until Jesus comes, or until we are Led to Him. I can see how the Levitical Priesthood would become obsolete after Jesus comes, and the Scriptures teach this through Paul. But here is a man calling Jesus "Master", asking Him a Serious Question about the Law you claim is passed away, after he has found and believed in Jesus.

Did Jesus say "You don't need God's Law now that you have found me"? No! Did He mention the "works of the law" of atonement given to Levi on Israel's behalf? NO!!!

For me this is a No Brainer, as I don't have a religious philosophy to promote or defend.

When Jesus needed strength and guidance, HE went to the Law and Prophets and trusted what they said. Even when few others who called HIS Father their God did.

Matt. 4:3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.

4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;

9 And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.

10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

It would be fascinating if you could show me how Jesus interpreted these Laws of God differently than Moses, or Aaron. I look forward to the reply.

 

[Studyman]

NO ONE but Jesus was able to keep the Law.

Again, I hate to keep bringing this stuff up. But you are promoting religious philosophies which are just not true, If the Holy Scriptures are our guide.

Gen. 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Gen. 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;

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

Num. 32:11 Surely none of the men that came up out of Egypt, from twenty years old and upward, shall see the land which I sware unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob; because they have not wholly followed me:

12 Save Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite, and Joshua the son of Nun: for they have wholly followed the LORD.

Luke 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

Luke 2:25 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.

26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord's Christ.

This is what I mean about the difference between the religious philosophies of men, and what the Holy Scriptures actually preach. Jesus never sinned, even from His Youth, but there were many Faithful believers in the Bible, who repented of their sins and followed the Path HE walked, a Path created by God for all HIS People to walk in. This little piece of Leaven, "NO ONE but Jesus was able to keep the Law" has infiltrated and infected the very foundation of the Gospel of the Christ of the Bible. How I hope you might consider what is written.

However......even those that Peter directly said were responsible for Jesus's death were brought into the Church on Pentecost.

Yes, "Pentecost", the Feast of the Christ which symbolized the First Fruits, the First to be begotten of God and born of God under the NEW Priesthood.

"Ye shall bring out of your habitations two wave loaves of two tenth deals: they shall be of fine flour; they shall be baken with leaven; they are the firstfruits unto the LORD."

It's never been about how well a person kept the Law. I believe it was BABerean2 that brought up earlier how poorly David would rate, if the score were being kept on "keeping the Law". David would have been disqualified early on. He committed adultery and had Bathsheba's husband murdered....yet King David's throne is written to be in heaven....and the throne that Jesus took over....so it has to be about something else besides how well a person "kept the Law":

I have to be honest, I get chills every time I see someone use David as an excuse to reject God's Laws.

This is why it's important to follow the Path the Christ of the Bible laid out. Because if you don't, men will use your sin as an excuse for theirs. God points this out in the story of David, the Apple of His Eye. A story that Paul said was written for our examples, and what happened to David, according to Paul, happened to him for our admonition. It's in your Bible. You two can judge David as a man who rejected God's Laws, but i will not Blaspheme the Lord's anointed by placing judgments on him that Jesus Himself would not make.

2 Sam. 12:13 And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.

14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.

So it isn't enough for you and BABerean2 that God had David's son taken away from him for this deed. You guys never mention the price David paid in this example God had written for us. But you are all to eager use David's story as an excuse to reject God's Laws. What will you say in that day? "But Lord, Lord, David sinned and you forgave him"?

You both are free to hold David up as a reason why you believe God's Laws are become obsolete, but I will not.. And either did Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, John, Luke, Timothy, nor has anyone else in the entire Bible accused David, nor has anyone showed the nakedness of David. You do, BABerean2 does, and "many" more who come in Jesus Name, hold David up as a token of their unrighteousness, but the Faithful in the Bible accepted GOD's Judgment of him, and so do I.

I am being stern here because I know that it is against God to use His Anointed for the purpose you both are using him. If you don't listen to a single thing I say, listen to this. Don't add yourself to the list of men who have blasphemed God's Good Name because of the example God gave us through David.

Acts 2
36Therefore let all Israel know with certainty that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ!”

37When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and asked Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”38Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39This promise belongs to you and your children and to all who are far off—to all whom the Lord our God will call to Himself.”40With many other words he testified, and he urged them, “Be saved from this corrupt generation.” 41Those who embraced his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to the believers that day.j​

Yes, "Be Saved from this corrupt generation" who "Transgress the Commandments of God by their own religious traditions".

 

[Studyman]

What I believe isn't based on "religious philosophy" (as if apart from what's written in the Bible) but from almost all the text of the New Testament. The whole New Testament testifies that Christ bought something NEW. Someting described as "turning the world upside down" (Acts 17:6).

If the Mainstream Religion of that time were "Teaching for doctrines the Commandments of Men" and not God, as Jesus said, and if the Mainstream Preachers of Paul's time considered the Law and Prophets "Heresy", as Paul tells us in Acts 24. Then if Jesus and Paul were reasoning with these Preachers out of the Scriptures, which Jesus and Paul both did, then this would be a NEW teaching for them. But not a New Teaching for Jesus or Paul.

Acts 24:13 Neither can they (Jews) prove the things whereof they (Jews) now accuse me.

14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they (Jews) call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

So according to the Scriptures, the Gospel that was taught to the Children of Israel, that they didn't mix with Faith, isn't a "New Gospel", it's just that the Mainstream Preachers of that time were preaching a different Gospel. So it was NEW to them, but not NEW to the Christ. It was HIS Gospel that HE had taught for centuries.

Heb. 4:1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.

2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

So the Gospel Paul taught these men was no different than the Gospel taught in the Law and Prophets, at least according to the Christ of the Bible who inspired these Words. Yes, the manner in which God's Law is administered and the manner in which sins were forgiven, has changed as prophesied. But the Gospel message was always been the same, as Paul tells us.

Rom. 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

Paul confirms this in his letter to the Romans.

Rom. 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

17 For therein ( From within the Gospel of Christ) is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. (Hab. 4:4, of the Law and Prophets)

18 For the wrath of God is revealed (Not in the New Testament, but the OT where the Gospel of Christ was first preached) from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. (But it didn't profit them not being mixed with Faith)

So the true Gospel of Christ was not NEW, as you have been convinced. It was just "NEW" to those people who had received their knowledge of God from the Mainstream Preachers of their time.

What I am pointing out is the difference between the gospel taught by the mainstream preachers of their time, and ours, and the Gospel of Christ taught in the Holy Scriptures written for our admonition.

The Gospel Paul and Jesus taught comes from the Law and Prophets, the gospel taught by the religions of their time, and ours, consider the Law and Prophets Heresy, or obsolete.

I don't believe the 2nd Corinthians verses you posted makes void God's definition of sin or Righteousness. Nor does it make Paul's other words void. Like Jesus said, His People should live by Every Word of God, not just those which can be used to promote this religious philosophy or that.

But thanks for the opportunity to point these things out, these are good discussions for "people" to have.

 

[mkgal1]

WOW, Can you provide scriptures which supports this religious philosophy? I have never heard that God's Laws change depending on who interprets it. This is a pretty big deal, I can't believe I missed the Scriptures which show this doctrine. I am looking forward to you providing the Word's of God which confirm this teaching

I just shared one passage from Hebrews.

But it's not "God's Laws" that are changing (as this thread is proof of - there are differences of opinion as to what "God'sLaws" are). Because of that- there were mediators of God's covenants after Adam & Eve to speak on God's behalf. The issue is - humans are bias and imperfect. Only Jesus was perfectly worthy to speak for God.

As far as covenants throughout the Bible -there was first Noah....then Abraham....Moses....and King David. I'm sure you'll reject this....but I believe the Bible Project has done a great job summarizing God's covenants with humanity:

Since our culture is vastly different from the ancient Hebrew culture - it's necessary for us to learn about the cultural context that the Bible was written. Covenants are an important aspect of the Biblical narrative.

 

[mkgal1]

I have to be honest, I get chills every time I see someone use David as an excuse to reject God's Laws.

That's not what's being done.

Using the term "God's Laws" to label the laws of your choosing (and rejecting Scripture that states otherwise ) is a false appeal to authority. It can't be verified by God (nor is it stated in the Bible). It's a personal human interpretation (or "religious philosophy", if you prefer).

 

[mkgal1]

So the true Gospel of Christ was not NEW, as you have been convinced

I've not posted that the true Gospel is new. I believe what is written in Ephesians 1:4....that His plan was even before the foundation of the world.

 

[mkgal1]

Did Jesus say "You don't need God's Law now that you have found me"

No.....because that's your personal term.

 

[Studyman]

That's not what's being done.

Using the term "God's Laws" to label the laws of your choosing (and rejecting Scripture that states otherwise ) is a false appeal to authority. It can't be verified by God (nor is it stated in the Bible). It's a personal human interpretation (or "religious philosophy", if you prefer).

Well that it an interesting religious philosophy.

You have said here that the term I use "God's Laws", is a Label of my choosing. I really never thought of that before. Let's see if this judgment of yours is true or not, according to the Scriptures.

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

I'm not sure how you can look at these Holy Word's of God and determine that God isn't referring to "God's Laws".

But let's not make the judgment until we look at more Scriptures, perhaps there was another Lawgiver that I don't know about.

Ex. 16:27 And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none.

28 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?

29 See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.

So here again, it seems your claim that I have made up the term "God's Laws" as a "false appeal to authority" is questionable. There can be no doubt as to whose Laws these people who call God Lord, Lord, refused to keep.

This Sabbath is "God's Law", as HE says here. And the Sabbath of the 10 commandments was given to them, "By God".

But this Sabbath might not be "God's Law", maybe calling this Sabbath "God's Law" is a false appeal to authority.

Let's continue.

Lev. 23:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, Concerning the feasts of the LORD, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my feasts.

3 Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, an holy convocation; ye shall do no work therein: it is the sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings.

4 These are the feasts of the LORD, even holy convocations, which ye shall proclaim in their seasons.

5 In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD'S passover.

I don't believe you have thought out your accusation of me that I am "Using the term "God's Laws" to label the laws of my choosing (and rejecting Scripture that states otherwise ) is a false appeal to authority" in this latest judgment you have made."

It is obvious now why you didn't provide the "Scriptures" you claim I reject. They don't exist. The Scriptures I posted have clearly shown that the Term "God's Laws" are perfectly accurate, and the Proper Appeal to Authority.

But what about the future, in the New Covenant? What Laws are going to be administered? Let's let the God of the Bible answer this question.

Jer. 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD,

This is the Same Lord that Abraham obeyed is it not? The Same God who gave Israel HIS Feasts, and HIS Sabbaths and HIS Laws?

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.

How is this not "God's Laws"? Who has convinced you the Term "God's Laws" are of my own choosing? What other Authority does your religious Philosophy "appeal to"?

Is. 33:22 For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.

Is this your Lord? Or have you found another, with "new" Laws?

James 4:12 There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: ******************************who art thou that judgest another?

I know there are religious philosophies out there that we are to beware of, and men who come in Jesus name that will deceive many, so it seems prudent to "test the spirits" when he hear religious philosophies.

I'm not sure who convinced you that there is another Lawgiver, than the Christ, who came to earth, and became my High Priest. Or that the Laws HE gave were not "His Laws".

But there can be no doubt that the term "GODS LAWS" is the Proper Appeal to Authority, if one believes in the Christ of the Bible.

Many are on a broad path, convinced of another authority, another lawgiver, one that has different laws, not the Laws of the ONE Lawgiver of the Holy Scriptures.

It is this massive religion that I am sounding the trumpet about. As Jesus, the ONE Lawgiver said, both as the God of the OT and as my High Priest in the NT.

"Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every Word which proceeds from the mouth of God".

I believe He is the Proper Authority to Appeal to.

 

[Studyman]

I've not posted that the true Gospel is new. I believe what is written in Ephesians 1:4....that His plan was even before the foundation of the world.

I was replying to your statement " The whole New Testament testifies that Christ bought something NEW."

You really didn't address my post at all, as if I didn't even reply.

OH well, It was a good exercise for me anyway. Thank you for providing the statement to reply to.

 

[Studyman]

The only thing any of us can assert are still interpretations. None of us can claim we know "God's Laws" over another.​

This is true. It is only a Book. A person either believes it's content or they don't. But to say that the Laws contained there-in, are not the Laws of the God depicted therein, is foolishness in my view.

I'm not suggesting there was never a purpose for the feasts....on the contrary....I'm pointing out that Christ has fulfilled the feasts and served their purpose. The feasts (like Passover, for instance) were a type....Christ was the reality of what they pointed to.

I thought the "Passover" was an event, Prophesied by the Word's of a Book which claims to be the Inspired "Word of God".

Where did you get the teaching that Passover was a "type" and not a Prophesied event?

So you disagree with what Paul wrote to the Galatians, recorded in chapter 4?Here is part of it:

Galatians 4:21-26 ~
21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, do you not understand what the law says? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.(b)23His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born through the promise.24These things serve as illustrations, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children into slavery: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present-day Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.

I believe what Paul is saying here as it was taught in the Law and Prophets, I just don't believe the religious philosophy you are using his words to promote..

Being "under the law" means being dead because you broke the law. If Jesus has paid the debt for your past sins, and therefore made you alive, free from death and sin, why would you break God's Law again, and bring you back under the law of sin, back under the Yoke of Bondage sin and deception brings?

Like Paul said;

15 What then? shall we sin, (Transgress the Law) because we are not under the law, (Dead) but under grace? (Alive) God forbid.

16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, (Under the Law, under slavery of sin and death) or of obedience unto righteousness? ( Alive by Faith/Belief/obedience)

Abraham had two sons which represent two covenants.

The covenant of the Free son.
​

15 See, I have set before thee this day life (Freedom) and good, and death (slavery) and evil;

16 In that I command thee this day to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest live and multiply: and the LORD thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

The Covenant with the enslaved son.

17 But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them; (doing service unto them which by nature are no gods.)

18 I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it.

The modern Jerusalem (Mainstream religions who call the God of the Bible, their God) is still enslaved because they still will not hear, as Jesus said. They believe the voice that tells them "You shall surely not die", even though they have rejected His Instructions.

37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

But for those who deny themselves and "walk" or follow the Path Jesus created and walked, Paul has this to say.

Rom. 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, ( those who Yield Themselves to the "other " voice)) but (Walk) after the Spirit. ( to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, like Abraham, Isaac, Caleb and Simeon, are all heirs according to the promise of Life.))

2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus (Who is the Spirit of Life that was in Jesus?) hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Of course not.....but, again, that relies on interpretation (and, I believe, the Holy Spirit).

Again.....what you're presenting *is* a philosophy of a man. It's an interpretation of the biblical text.​

Jesus also "interpreted" Biblical Text, and so did Paul. In fact, all the Prophets were sent because the Mainstream Preachers of their time were not properly "Interpreting" the written Word's they claimed were the Word's of the One true God.

It is my understanding that I am sharing, and providing detailed examinations of Scripture for to provide insight as to how I came to this understanding.

I only wish to promote the Holy scriptures as our source for our instruction in righteousness, and I am promoting their examination.

 

[Studyman]

Christ's own Words are "all".

Here:

Luke 18
31 Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, and all things that are written by the prophets concerning the Son of man shall be accomplished.

And here:

Luke 24
44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Was Christ denying His own Words?

It appears that your "all" is different from His "all".

I am accepting the Christ's Words that you highlighted. "Shall be accomplished" as true in my understanding. Has HE returned and gathered all that offend and live in iniquity, and cast them into a Lake of Fire?


Of course not. So by your own Posts, "ALL" things written about HIM "SHALL BE" Accomplished, but "ALL" things He we Prophesied to Accomplish has not yet come to pass.

If you are preaching that HE has already "Accomplished" all things written in the Law and Prophets about Him, then it is you who are denying the very Word's of the Christ you posted. Because "all things must be fulfilled" which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning Him.

He will return, as Prophesied. At least that is my Faith.

 

[Studyman]

No, of course I'm not saying that. Jesus not only "forgave" sin....John announced Him by saying "He takes away" the sin of this world (John 1:29).

So how did HE sprinkle the blood of a turtle dove on the alter to accomplish this?

You know the point I'm making here, why can't you just admit that Jesus forgave sins, but not by performing the Levitical Priesthood "Works of the law"?