Establish The Law

Clare73 said:

New (kainos--that which is unaccustomed or unused, new as to form or quality, of different nature from what is contrasted as old) covenant (Lk 22:20) is a covenant of a new form, a new quality, a new nature.

Different nature , new quality is not "renewal," it is "new."
The new covenant being of a different nature and quality than is the old covenant makes it "new," not a "renewal" of the old Mosaic covenant they had before.
How do you call the new covenant of grace a renewal of the old covenant of law?

Your eschatology is driving your erroneous NT hermeneutic.

Click to expand...

I quoted the Testimony of the Master from his own words in a BOOK written with LETTERS which you say you have no need for. Thank you for revealing the blind ignorance and hypocrisy of your anti-knowledge of Elohim, anti-Logos doctrines: it only reveals that you speak from yourself, and your own spirit, and from other BOOKS written with LETTERS by other teachers.

Clare73 said:

How do you call the new covenant of grace a renewal of the old covenant of law?

Click to expand...

Because the Spirit of Grace was added by way of and in the Testimony of the Meshiah which, as already explained, is the Spirit of Grace.

Clare73 said:

Your eschatology is driving your erroneous NT hermeneutic.

Click to expand...

You have already destroyed your credibility in that also: for all the Prophets and the Torah prophesied until the Immerser, and the Prophets do expound from the Torah, which you say you do not need. It is therefore highly unlikely that your eschatology be correct, and certainly unwise to set yourself up as judge of anyone else's eschatology. In the greatest book of eschatology, the Apocalypse, we read the following statement.

Revelation 19:10 YLT
10 and I fell before his feet, to bow before him, and he saith to me, 'See--not! fellow servant of thee am I, and of thy brethren, those having the testimony of Jesus; bow before God, for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of the prophecy.'

This is again yet another confirmation of what has already been said herein multiple times in multiple ways: testimony is spirit, whether for the good or whether for the evil, (the prince of the power of the air and spirit of the world), and the Testimony of the Meshiah is the new Spirit of the renewed covenant foretold in Ezekiel the Prophet. And again, as the Master himself says of his Testimony given to him from the heavens, (John 3:27-36), from the Father:

John 6:63-64 KJV
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

daq said:

I quoted the Testimony of the Master from his own words in a BOOK written with LETTERS which you say you have no need for. Thank you for revealing the blind ignorance and hypocrisy of your anti-knowledge of Elohim, anti-Logos doctrines: it only reveals that you speak from yourself, and your own spirit, and from other BOOKS written with LETTERS by other teachers.

Click to expand...

These assertions made without Biblical demonstrations are, therefore, without Biblical merit.

daq said:

Because the Spirit of Grace was added by way of and in the Testimony of the Meshiah which, as already explained, is the Spirit of Grace.

Click to expand...

The old covenant of Moses is of law, the new covenant of Jesus is of grace.

Grace is not added to law, grace is opposed to law (Gal 5:4). They are mutually exclusive.
The presence of one automatically excludes the other.

daq said:

You have already destroyed your credibility

Click to expand...

And what does Gal 5:4 do to your credibility?

Clare73 said:

The old covenant of Moses is of law, the new covenant of Jesus is of grace.

Grace is not added to law, grace is opposed to law (Gal 5:4).

Click to expand...

Incorrect interpretation based on your belief system.

Clare73 said:

And what does Gal 5:4 do to your credibility?

Click to expand...

It proves what I have said from the scripture: Paul isn't deleting the whole Torah as you do, he is saying that justification does not come by doing "the works of the law" but by belief and faith in the Testimony which is written in the Torah, Prophets, and Writings, and the Apostolic writings, including the Gospel accounts, including the Testimony of the Meshiah.

Again, the Torah is spiritual, Romans 7:14a, and is not about what you do with your own works of the body and mind of the flesh after the teachings and instruction of the Pharisees and Sadducees, which things are rendered useless regarding justification. You continue trying to pin your fake strawman onto me for actually believing the scripture while you yourself cherry-pick what you will believe and set aside anything that doesn't agree with your privately held paradigm. If you still do not understand "the works of the law", after it has been explained so many times in different threads, then it is only because you choose not to hear.

Your insinuation that I believe doing "the works of the law" according to the mind of the Pharisees is necessary for justification is a false and erroneous insinuation. It isn't true and we've already been over it. Gal 5:4 actually proves what I have offered herein and in many other discussions with you. It's you who views the Torah according to the mind of the Pharisees, not me, which is why I keep referencing and-or quoting Romans 7:14, which you apparently refuse to hear and believe. Your mindset cannot be subject to the Torah because you view all things written in the Torah according to the flesh, the natural, and the physical, just as the Pharisees did and still do. Please review Romans 8:4-13 once again.

daq said:

Incorrect interpretation based on your belief system.

Click to expand...

Gal 5:4 is not interpretation, it is grammar.

Clare73 said:

Gal 5:4 is not interpretation, it is grammar.

Click to expand...

Again, circumcision is the seal and the first work of "the works of the law", and anyone who undergoes outward circumcision according to the mind of the flesh interpretation of the Pharisees agrees to continue in all of their doctrine and doctrinal interpretations of the Torah, which even they themselves call "the custom of Mosheh" so as to lend legitimacy to their own private interpretations of the Torah. You are barking up the wrong tree: I am not a Pharisee, and your misunderstanding of the text also proves what I have said about hearing the Logos within the written letter of any holy text.

Galatians 5:1-2 KJV
1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

Why will Meshiah profit you nothing? Because his teachings are Spirit, not concerning the natural and the physical or the mind of the flesh. If one undergoes physical circumcision then the same agrees to immerse in all the doctrines and teachings of the Pharisees which are based on carnal reasoning of the natural mind of the natural man. You cannot choose both: it is either the Pharisee way or the new way of the Master as taught in all his parables, proverbs, sayings, idioms, and teachings in the Gospel accounts. If you cannot see the difference between these two ways then what else can be said of you but that perhaps you are spiritually blind?

Galatians 5:3 KJV
3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

Again, if one becomes circumcised he becomes a debtor to the whole Torah, and that is, to observe and serve the whole Torah according to the Pharisee way of understanding and interpretation: and again, circumcision of the foreskin of the flesh of a male is the entry-level seal into the Pharisee way of interpreting the Torah.

Galatians 5:4 KJV
4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

It says "justified by the law, (Torah)", and again, where have I said any such thing? I haven't even though many love to insinuate and accuse me of such. Where have I said to anyone anywhere in this forum board or any other board here that men must be circumcised in the foreskin of their flesh? That is outward circumcision of the male genitalia: I have said no such thing, for I actually believe Paul and the Torah which both teach that circumcision is of the heart. Have these passages not been posted? They have but you ignore them, making yourself an unrighteous judge, one who plays judge while ignoring evidence that exonerates most of those whom you chose to judge.

Deuteronomy 10:16, Deuteronomy 30:6, Romans 2:28-29.

Circumcision is not done away with: it was merely misunderstood and misinterpreted by the Pharisees, Sadducees, and anyone else who walks according to the flesh and the mind of the flesh.

Romans 15:8-9 ASV
8 For I say that Christ hath been made a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, that he might confirm the promises given unto the fathers,
9 and that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, Therefore will I give praise unto thee among the Gentiles, And sing unto thy name.

In what follows in the Galatians 5 passage Paul says to them, "A little leaven leavens the whole lump", (Gal 5:9), and he says this because what I have presented here from the Logos in his words is the truth: if a man accepts that circumcision is outward and physical, concerning the clipping of the flesh of his foreskin, this little bit of Pharisee leaven is the seal which enjoins the proselyte to then continue in all the natural minded teachings of the Pharisees concerning the whole Torah, until the whole lump is fully leavened. You can neither tell from where he comes or to where he is headed.

daq said:

Again, circumcision is the seal and the first work of "the works of the law", and anyone who undergoes outward circumcision according to the mind of the flesh interpretation of the Pharisees agrees to continue in all of their doctrine and doctrinal interpretations of the Torah, which even they themselves call "the custom of Mosheh" so as to lend legitimacy to their own private interpretations of the Torah. You are barking up the wrong tree: I am not a Pharisee, and your misunderstanding of the text also proves what I have said about hearing the Logos within the written letter of any holy text.

Click to expand...

Nice personally-contrived esoteric distinction to separate oneself from those inferior believers in Jesus Christ.

daq said:

Galatians 5:1-2 KJV
1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
Why will Meshiah profit you nothing? Because his teachings are Spirit, not concerning the natural and the physical or the mind of the flesh. If one undergoes physical circumcision then the same agrees to immerse in all the doctrines and teachings of the Pharisees which are based on carnal reasoning of the natural mind of the natural man. You cannot choose both: it is either the Pharisee way or the new way of the Master as taught in all his parables, proverbs, sayings, idioms, and teachings in the Gospel accounts. If you cannot see the difference between these two ways then what else can be said of you but that perhaps you are spiritually blind?
Galatians 5:3 KJV
3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Again, if one becomes circumcised he becomes a debtor to the whole Torah, and that is, to observe and serve the whole Torah according to the Pharisee way of understanding and interpretation: and again, circumcision of the foreskin of the flesh of a male is the entry-level seal into the Pharisee way of interpreting the Torah.

Click to expand...

Galatians 5:4 KJV
4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
It says "justified by the law, (Torah)", and again, where have I said any such thing? I haven't even though many love to insinuate and accuse me of such. Where have I said to anyone anywhere in this forum board or any other board here that men must be circumcised in the foreskin of their flesh?

Click to expand...

The law is not just circumcision. The law is also the ceremonial (Levitical) laws, as well as the Decalogue.
None of them justifies.
In justification, Paul opposes meritorious works of all law to the free gift of grace, clearly stated in Gal 5:4:
Christ is of no effect to whomsoever seeks to be justified by the law; i.e., the law excludes grace, and grace excludes the law in salvation and justification.
Whoever relies on the law has thereby excluded (fallen from) grace, and there is no salvation nor justification by any law keeping (Gal 5:4).

Clare73 said:

Nice personally-contrived esoteric distinction to separate oneself from those inferior believers in Jesus Christ.


The law is not just circumcision. The law is also the ceremonial (Levitical) laws, as well as the Decalogue.
None of them justifies.
In justification, Paul opposes meritorious works of all law to the free gift of grace, clearly stated in Gal 5:4:
Christ is of no effect to whomsoever seeks to be justified by the law; i.e., the law excludes grace, and grace excludes the law in salvation and justification.
Whoever relies on the law has thereby excluded (fallen from) grace, and there is no salvation nor justification by any law keeping (Gal 5:4).

Click to expand...

What is it you always say? Something about no biblical demonstration. Look in the mirror: you are simply making stuff up and using scripture as if it says what you say it says. It doesn't.

Moreover Paul does not speak, write, and teach in a vacuum: one of the reasons I made sure to include Gal 5:9 at the end of my previous post is because it is a form of remez, a hint or a pointer to a specific passage.

Paul teaches the commandments of the Master:

1 Corinthians 14:36-37 KJV
36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

Galatians 5:7-9 KJV
7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.

It is therefore about doctrine, and that is, specifically, about the doctrine of the Pharisees:

Luke 12:1 KJV
1 In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples first of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.

Matthew 16:5-12 KJV
5 And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.
6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.
8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?
9 Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
10 Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

If you view circumcision as outward and physical then you hold the same doctrine as the Pharisees and Sadducees. Moreover if you hold that view of the commandments in the Torah, concerning circumcision, then you are admonished to follow through with the same outward physical view of all things so that you not be a hypocrite side-winding back and forth between the natural, outward, and physical view, and the supernal and spiritual view which is of above and taught in the Testimony of the Meshiah in the Gospel accounts. That would be no different than having one foot in the world, and one foot in the heavenly things, a double standard, and that is likely why the Master also says, either make the tree good, (one type of understanding, spiritual), or make the tree evil, (the other way of understanding, outward, natural, and physical, which is to choose death). And while Paul indeed says that the Torah is spiritual, again Romans 7:14a, nowhere does he or anyone else say that the Torah is sometimes spiritual and sometimes outward and physical in meaning.

Therefore, if you choose the Pharisee doctrine when it comes to understanding the commandments in the Torah concerning circumcision, then you are obligated to view the whole Torah in the same outward and physical way of understanding the Torah, and therefore, just as Paul says, Meshiah profits you nothing because it is his Testimony in the Gospel accounts which teaches the supernal and spiritual way that was rejected by the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes.

daq said:

What is it you always say? Something about no biblical demonstration. Look in the mirror: you are simply making stuff up and using scripture as if it says what you say it says. It doesn't.
Moreover Paul does not speak, write, and teach in a vacuum: one of the reasons I made sure to include Gal 5:9 at the end of my previous post is because it is a form of remez, a hint or a pointer to a specific passage.
Paul teaches the commandments of the Master:
1 Corinthians 14:36-37 KJV
36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
Galatians 5:7-9 KJV
7 Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?
8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you.
9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
It is therefore about doctrine, and that is, specifically, about the doctrine of the Pharisees:
Luke 12:1 KJV
1 In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples first of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.
Matthew 16:5-12 KJV
5 And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.
6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.
8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?
9 Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
10 Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
If you view circumcision as outward and physical then you hold the same doctrine as the Pharisees and Sadducees. Moreover if you hold that view of the commandments in the Torah, concerning circumcision, then you are admonished to follow through with the same outward physical view of all things so that you not be a hypocrite side-winding back and forth between the natural, outward, and physical view, and the supernal and spiritual view which is of above and taught in the Testimony of the Meshiah in the Gospel accounts. That would be no different than having one foot in the world, and one foot in the heavenly things, a double standard, and that is likely why the Master also says, either make the tree good, (one type of understanding, spiritual), or make the tree evil, (the other way of understanding, outward, natural, and physical, which is to choose death). And while Paul indeed says that the Torah is spiritual, again Romans 7:14a, nowhere does he or anyone else say that the Torah is sometimes spiritual and sometimes outward and physical in meaning.

Click to expand...

Therefore, if you choose the Pharisee doctrine when it comes to understanding the commandments in the Torah concerning circumcision, then you are obligated to view the whole Torah in the same outward and physical way of understanding the Torah, and therefore, just as Paul says, Meshiah profits you nothing because it is his Testimony in the Gospel accounts which teaches the supernal and spiritual way that was rejected by the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes.

Click to expand...

Circumcision was to be both outward of the foreskin for entrance into the Abrahamic covenant, and inward of the heart (cutting off of the sinful flesh).

Anyone who required physical circumcision for salvation or justification had cut himself off from grace (Gal 5:4), the source of salvation and justification through faith only, not by (meritorious) works or law keeping (Eph 2:8-9, Ro 3:28), for works and grace are mutually exclusive in salvation and justification; i.e., one necessarily exlcudes the other.

HIM said:

Yes it does. But we are not speaking of the content written and engraved in tables of stone and ink on parchment howbeit some letter to relay what God wants, His teachings, His Torah, the Law. We are speaking of how it was delivered. It's administration through the tables of stone and parchment. The ministry of His teachings has changed from that to us being living letters, epistles. As God has said, I will put my Laws into our minds and into our hearts will I write them. Therefore, His Word is not far from us, it is in our hearts and mouths and in our hands to do it. (Deut 30:10-14 Septuagint) That is the faith in which we preach. We have of His Spirit. The Ministry is TO BE no longer of the tables of stone, the Decalogue and ink on parchment, the Pentateuch but through us and what we become in Christ through His Spirit. He in us, us in Him that the world believe. He doeth the work. For it is He that works in us both to will and do His good pleasure. Behold we have become new and are of God. For where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty. So we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

2Cor 2:14 Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place.

2Cor 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

2Cor 3:1 Do we begin again to commend ourselves? or need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you?
2Cor 3:2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:
2Cor 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
2Cor 3:4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:
2Cor 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
2Cor 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
2Cor 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:
2Cor 3:8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
2Cor 3:9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.
2Cor 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.
2Cor 3:11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.
2Cor 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
2Cor 3:18 So we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

Click to expand...

Please take note to the underlined, bolded emphasis above.

daq said:

Every wine-skin formerly belonged to a living creature, (typically a goat). The skin had to be taken to a tanner to be cleansed, treated, refreshed, (kainos), renewed, (kainos), and repurposed before it could be filled with neos-new wine. Neos-new wine is fresh squeezed or pressed and cannot be renewed: neos is brand new, kainos is new in the sense of fresh, refreshed, renewed, etc., etc, and every version of the wine-skins parable or saying juxtaposes these two words in the same manner.

1 Samuel 11:14 KJV
14 Then said Samuel to the people, Come, and let us go to Gilgal, and renew the kingdom there.

Jeremiah 31:31 KJV
31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

H2318 חָדַשׁ chadash (chaw-dash') v.
1. to be new.
2. (causatively) to rebuild.
[a primitive root]
KJV: renew, repair.

H2319 חָדָשׁ chadash (chaw-dawsh') adj.
new.
[from H2318]
KJV: fresh, new thing.
Root(s): H2318

H2320 חֹדֶשׁ chodesh (cho'-desh) n-m.
1. the new moon.
2. (by implication) a month.
[from H2318]
KJV: month(-ly), new moon.
Root(s): H2318

These are all the same word, חדש, in the original Ashuri text from the time of Ezra.
The Masoretes and James Strong created the above divisions.
Jeremiah 31:31 OG LXX
31 (38:31) ιδου ημεραι ερχονται φησιν κυριος και διαθησομαι τω οικω ισραηλ και τω οικω ιουδα διαθηκην καινην

Hebrews 8:8 T/R
8 μεμφομενος γαρ αυτοις λεγει ιδου ημεραι ερχονται λεγει κυριος και συντελεσω επι τον οικον ισραηλ και επι τον οικον ιουδα διαθηκην καινην

Hebrews 8:8 N/A-W/H
8 μεμφομενος γαρ αυτους λεγει ιδου ημεραι ερχονται λεγει κυριος και συντελεσω επι τον οικον ισραηλ και επι τον οικον ιουδα διαθηκην καινην

Click to expand...

Yet the Masoretic text is what God preserved. And the LXX actually confirms it in this instance.

daq said:

By the usage of the words neos and kainos in the parable of the wine-skins the Master himself expounds the meanings of these words to those willing to hear, understand, see, and perceive.

Luke 5:37-39 T/R
37 και ουδεις βαλλει οινον νεον εις ασκους παλαιους ει δε μηγε ρηξει ο νεος οινος τους ασκους και αυτος εκχυθησεται και οι ασκοι απολουνται
38 αλλα οινον νεον εις ασκους καινους βλητεον και αμφοτεροι συντηρουνται
39 και ουδεις πιων παλαιον ευθεως θελει νεον λεγει γαρ ο παλαιος χρηστοτερος εστιν

Luke 5:37-39 N/A-W/H
37 και ουδεις βαλλει οινον νεον εις ασκους παλαιους ει δε μη γε ρηξει ο οινος ο νεος τους ασκους και αυτος εκχυθησεται και οι ασκοι απολουνται
38 αλλα οινον νεον εις ασκους καινους βλητεον
39 ουδεις πιων παλαιον θελει νεον λεγει γαρ ο παλαιος χρηστος εστιν

Luke 5:37-39 ASV
37 And no man putteth new [neos] wine into old wine-skins; else the new [neos] wine will burst the skins and itself will be spilled, and the skins will perish.
38 But new [neos] wine must be put into fresh [kainos] wine-skins.
39 And no man having drunk old wine desireth new [neos];for he saith, The old is good.
The wine-skin is the heart, which obviously must be renewed: the Kohen keeps the skin of the offering, and he takes it to Simon the Tanner, who turns the skin into what the Kohen desires it to be, whether it will be used for parchments, or a wine-skin, or whatever. And as I said, the skin formerly belonged to a living creature and must be cleansed, refreshed, (kainos) renewed, (kainos), and repurposed.

View attachment 334681 View attachment 334682

Click to expand...

We are renewed in a sense but the covenant is new. Renewed is a completely different word. If what you say was intended in the parable and in respect to the Covenant, it would have been used. As it is in the text below.


Col 3:10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

daq said:

I quoted the Testimony of the Master from his own words in a BOOK written with LETTERS which you say you have no need for. Thank you for revealing the blind ignorance and hypocrisy of your anti-knowledge of Elohim, anti-Logos doctrines: it only reveals that you speak from yourself, and your own spirit, and from other BOOKS written with LETTERS by other teachers.

Click to expand...

Nothing being mentioned by Jesus as being renewed, only new in Luke 5. These words highlighted in bold that you say about another have been said to you a lot, haven't they?

Luke 5:38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.


Contrast that with the preceding parable and we see exactly how Jesus seen and understood the word in question.

Luke 5:36 And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.

As we look through the LXX and the TR we find no instance where Kainos is being used as a renewing in the context that you say. But we might of missed one.

HIM said:

Please take note to the underlined, bolded emphasis above.

Yet the Masoretic text is what God preserved. And the LXX actually confirms it in this instance.

We are renewed in a sense but the covenant is new. Renewed is a completely different word. If what you say was intended in the parable and in respect to the Covenant, it would have been used. As it is in the text below.


Col 3:10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.



Nothing being mentioned by Jesus as being renewed, only new in Luke 5. These words highlighted in bold that you say about another have been said to you a lot, haven't they?

Luke 5:38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.


Contrast that with the preceding parable and we see exactly how Jesus seen and understood the word in question.

Luke 5:36 And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.

As we look through the LXX and the TR we find no instance where Kainos is being used as a renewing in the context that you say. But we might of missed one.

Click to expand...

Interesting discussion to be sure.

Just a couple of notes to add to what you and Daq are discussing.

Jesus did say: Matt. 18: 3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

And again;

John 3: 3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

We have all been born, and were all children at one time, but grew up to be stubborn and stiff necked "Children of Disobedience". The Jesus of the Bible tells us here to be renewed, become children "AGAIN". Not become some "NEW" thing, but a Child "again" who, like a Child, can be taught, corrected and instructed in the matters of doctrine and God's righteousness which have existed since time began. The instruction in righteousness doesn't change, we do.

The very foundation of God's Salvation is "Change". God doesn't change, we change. And we change into the man "created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. In this condition, we can receive the "NEW" understanding, in the renewed mind. That is, the meaning of God's Word in the first place. The same "wine" Zacharias received, Simeon received, Anna received, Caleb received, etc. It's not "New wine" in the sense that it never before existed. The recipe is as old as time, Noah and Abraham drank of it. It's just "NEW" for us.

Luke 5: 36 And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.

37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.

38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.

It's still a bottle. But one that is clean without the influence of other "spirits".

39 No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

I love this part. So many religious men, like the Pharisees, are perfectly satisfied with their own ancient religious doctrines and traditions, and therefore, there is no desire to "SEEK" after God. So they don't humble themselves as a child before God and His Word, and therefore do not receive the "NEW" understanding, because why would God place His perfect wine in an old wineskin?

It is our perception of God and His Word that changes. Our understanding of them that changes. Because as Paul points out, "The Law is Spiritual". It has always been Spiritual. It will always be Spiritual.

1 Cor. 9: 9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? 10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

According to the "Letter", it could be perceived as a Law that is only for farmers and those who have oxen. But as Paul teaches, the Law is spiritual. There is a meaning to this Law. A meaning written specifically for those who would be born "After those days". A Spiritual meaning. When we become humble children "again" and this time "Seek His Kingdom and His righteousness", we learn what these Word's meant all along. We are renewed in the spirit of our mind.

With this NEW understanding, all things are "NEW" for us. But as Daq implies, in my understanding of his posts, the "Letter" never changed. It is our understanding of the letter that changed. The true meaning and intent of the Letter never changes.

God even tells us this. "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."

There is no prophesy of a "New Law", the LAW is the same. It is man's understanding that is changed.

We are therefore "brought back" into God's Covenant. Not the One HE "ADDED" after the Golden Calf, but the one "they broke". God's Covenant with Abraham.

Ex. 19: 5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:

Gen. 17: 1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. 2 And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.

The Jesus of the Bible brought the same Covenant.

Matt. 5: 48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Paul understood this as his goal in the journey he was on.

Phil. 3: 12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.

13 Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, 14 I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. 15 Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.

The Messiah was an example of a perfect man walking perfectly in the Torah. He is the example of how a man is supposed to be from the very beginning. The true Spiritual intent of God's instruction in Righteousness written on His Heart. When His Spirit dwells within us, that is His Words, we can become the New Man receiving the New Wine that Abraham and all the faithful also received.

Rom. 4: 12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

Col. 3:10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

1 John 2: 5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. 6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

7 Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning. 8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.

It is man's understanding of the Letter that is "NEW", not the "Letter".

Studyman said:

Jesus did say: Matt. 18: 3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

And again;

John 3: 3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

We have all been born, and were all children at one time, but grew up to be stubborn and stiff necked "Children of Disobedience". The Jesus of the Bible tells us here to be renewed, become children "AGAIN". Not become some "NEW" thing, but a Child "again" who, like a Child, can be taught, corrected and instructed in the matters of doctrine and God's righteousness which have existed since time began. The instruction in righteousness doesn't change, we do.

The very foundation of God's Salvation is "Change". God doesn't change, we change. And we change into the man "created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. In this condition, we can receive the "NEW" understanding, in the renewed mind. That is, the meaning of God's Word in the first place. The same "wine" Zacharias received, Simeon received, Anna received, Caleb received, etc. It's not "New wine" in the sense that it never before existed. The recipe is as old as time, Noah and Abraham drank of it. It's just "NEW" for us.

Click to expand...

As you know It is the package that changed not the content. Righteousness and Life is and of God, He is the source. In Him we live move and have our being, for we are His children. Life He gives to all. His righteousness and the full life we can have, we have to choose to partake of.

Studyman said:

Luke 5: 36 And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.

37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.

38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.

It's still a bottle. But one that is clean without the influence of other "spirits".

39 No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

I love this part. So many religious men, like the Pharisees, are perfectly satisfied with their own ancient religious doctrines and traditions, and therefore, there is no desire to "SEEK" after God. So they don't humble themselves as a child before God and His Word, and therefore do not receive the "NEW" understanding, because why would God place His perfect wine in an old wineskin?

It is our perception of God and His Word that changes. Our understanding of them that changes. Because as Paul points out, "The Law is Spiritual". It has always been Spiritual. It will always be Spiritual.

Click to expand...

Yes the wine skin, us; had to be made new. All vessels for ministry needed cleansed and thereby consecrated for His Spirit to His fullest through His blood to enter through the veil that is to say His flesh to be in the presence of God.

Heb 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
Heb 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.


Heb 9:18 Whereupon neither the first testament was consecrated without blood.

Heb 10:19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,

Heb 10:20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;


The rest of your post we will have to take more time with and should be addressed separately. Have a great day my friend.

HIM said:

As you know It is the package that changed not the content.

Click to expand...

I don't know that. It seems that I can paint the package, make it appear righteous, but if the content of the package is unrighteousness, what really changed?

HIM said:

Yes the wine skin, us; had to be made new.

Click to expand...

There is nothing "New" about that philosophy. "If thou doest well, shall though not be accepted"? We have all gone astray and need to brought back to the "Way". I can see why Daq would understand the scriptures that way. The Scriptures I posted certainly support this understanding.

That is what I was trying to say.

HIM said:

All vessels for ministry needed cleansed and thereby consecrated for His Spirit to His fullest through His blood to enter through the veil that is to say His flesh to be in the presence of God.

Click to expand...

In my understanding, the "Wine" is the Truth of God. The True teaching of God. Why would God place His Holy Truth into a vessel not worthy to receive it? Nearly Everyone claims Jesus as their Lord, but their doctrines and religious philosophies are all over the place. Clearly there are "ministers" who claim His Spirit, but don't have His Spirit.

Are we not to "take heed" of this very thing? So when I hear a man, who claims to be a minister of God, who tells me Jesus brought a "New Way of the Lord", New Laws, a NEW Spirit, a NEW Salvation that never existed before, I beware of such a teaching. His "WAY" may be NEW to me, but it's not NEW. As the Scriptures I posted teach.

That is why I can understand why Daq speaks to a covenant that renews us, or brings us back where we were supposed to be all along. Not like the one God made with Israel, because they broke the Covenant of Abraham God gave them in the day HE brought them out of Egypt. A Covenant requiring daily sacrifices for sin that wasn't "ADDED" until 430 years after Abraham.

But one where God's LAWS are written in our minds and hearts, as in the days of Old, when Noah and Abraham talked with God.

HIM said:

The rest of your post we will have to take more time with and should be addressed separately. Have a great day my friend.

Click to expand...

Thanks Him, I think it is a topic worthy of discussing, and perhaps we might learn something we didn't know before. Something New!!!

You have a great day as well.

Studyman said:

I don't know that. It seems that I can paint the package, make it appear righteous, but if the content of the package is unrighteousness, what really changed?




There is nothing "New" about that philosophy. "If thou doest well, shall though not be accepted"? We have all gone astray and need to brought back to the "Way". I can see why Daq would understand the scriptures that way. The Scriptures I posted certainly support this understanding.

That is what I was trying to say.



In my understanding, the "Wine" is the Truth of God. The True teaching of God. Why would God place His Holy Truth into a vessel not worthy to receive it? Nearly Everyone claims Jesus as their Lord, but their doctrines and religious philosophies are all over the place. Clearly there are "ministers" who claim His Spirit, but don't have His Spirit.

Are we not to "take heed" of this very thing? So when I hear a man, who claims to be a minister of God, who tells me Jesus brought a "New Way of the Lord", New Laws, a NEW Spirit, a NEW Salvation that never existed before, I beware of such a teaching. His "WAY" may be NEW to me, but it's not NEW. As the Scriptures I posted teach.

That is why I can understand why Daq speaks to a covenant that renews us, or brings us back where we were supposed to be all along. Not like the one God made with Israel, because they broke the Covenant of Abraham God gave them in the day HE brought them out of Egypt. A Covenant requiring daily sacrifices for sin that wasn't "ADDED" until 430 years after Abraham.

But one where God's LAWS are written in our minds and hearts, as in the days of Old, when Noah and Abraham talked with God.



Thanks Him, I think it is a topic worthy of discussing, and perhaps we might learn something we didn't know before. Something New!!!

You have a great day as well.

Click to expand...

Real quick like. Dag says the Covenant has been renewed in respect to the Old. That is the issue we have with the doctrine he has. And please let Daq defend himself. Thanks.

Studyman said:

I don't know that. It seems that I can paint the package, make it appear righteous, but if the content of the package is unrighteousness, what really changed?




There is nothing "New" about that philosophy. "If thou doest well, shall though not be accepted"? We have all gone astray and need to brought back to the "Way". I can see why Daq would understand the scriptures that way. The Scriptures I posted certainly support this understanding.

That is what I was trying to say.



In my understanding, the "Wine" is the Truth of God. The True teaching of God. Why would God place His Holy Truth into a vessel not worthy to receive it? Nearly Everyone claims Jesus as their Lord, but their doctrines and religious philosophies are all over the place. Clearly there are "ministers" who claim His Spirit, but don't have His Spirit.

Are we not to "take heed" of this very thing? So when I hear a man, who claims to be a minister of God, who tells me Jesus brought a "New Way of the Lord", New Laws, a NEW Spirit, a NEW Salvation that never existed before, I beware of such a teaching. His "WAY" may be NEW to me, but it's not NEW. As the Scriptures I posted teach.

That is why I can understand why Daq speaks to a covenant that renews us, or brings us back where we were supposed to be all along. Not like the one God made with Israel, because they broke the Covenant of Abraham God gave them in the day HE brought them out of Egypt. A Covenant requiring daily sacrifices for sin that wasn't "ADDED" until 430 years after Abraham.

But one where God's LAWS are written in our minds and hearts, as in the days of Old, when Noah and Abraham talked with God.



Thanks Him, I think it is a topic worthy of discussing, and perhaps we might learn something we didn't know before. Something New!!!

You have a great day as well.

Click to expand...

HIM said:

Real quick like. Dag says the Covenant has been renewed in respect to the Old. That is the issue we have with the doctrine he has. And please let Daq defend himself. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Sorry I was not able respond sooner but I've been off-line the last nine or ten days.
You made some good points which I can certainly agree with Studyman.

daq said:

Incorrect interpretation based on your belief system.

Click to expand...

footnote on interpretation: 'private interpretation of scripture' is not permitted according to all Yahweh's Word in the Bible. Yet most ideas are formed, supported, and stated or claimed based on non-permitted interpretation, wittingly or unwittingly, right ?
In other words , the same observation as you posted, right or wrong in this case, is still applicable to most threads, forums and posts on the internet , in the media (all media on earth), in the news, and so on ?

Studyman said:

I don't know that. It seems that I can paint the package, make it appear righteous, but if the content of the package is unrighteousness, what really changed?

Click to expand...

Is this the equivalent to whitewashing tombs, or whitewashed tombs ?

Aaron112 said:

Is this the equivalent to whitewashing tombs, or whitewashed tombs ?

Click to expand...

Not sure you can have the latter without the former.

Aaron112 said:

footnote on interpretation: 'private interpretation of scripture' is not permitted according to all Yahweh's Word in the Bible. Yet most ideas are formed, supported, and stated or claimed based on non-permitted interpretation, wittingly or unwittingly, right ?
In other words , the same observation as you posted, right or wrong in this case, is still applicable to most threads, forums and posts on the internet , in the media (all media on earth), in the news, and so on ?

Click to expand...

John 1:16-17 KJV
16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

What it is that compels translators and translator teams to insert the word but, (usually in italics if it is a decent translation), into the above statement when there is nothing in the text that supports it?

From the Greek text of this one scripture statement alone I had good reason from the scripture to respond to Clare73 in the manner in which I did in the post you have quoted. As far as interpretation it must necessarily be case by case, every statement, every doctrine, every belief, everything compared with the scripture and what it teaches. We are building a sheep pen to keep out the wolves, (the kingdom of Elohim is within you), and we are admonished to take up our stakes, utterly deny ourselves, test the spirits, and not allow false doctrine into our houses.

The grace of Elohim is not opposed to the Torah of Elohim: mercy and the grace are remedial, making peace and reconciliation. Without the Torah there is no need for mercy and grace, for where there is no written law, there is no legally prosecutable transgression of a nonexistent law, resulting in lawlessness: and because the Torah was given through Mosheh, the grace and the truth came to be through Meshiah.