G-d does not break Covenants

[GeratTzedek]

Here is my idea of Covenant Theology:

G-d does not break His Covenants. Every Covenant He ever made is still in effect. Adam. Noah. Abraham. Israel through Moses. David. New Covenant. ALL OF THESE, simultaneously.

Period.

 

[JolieHeart]

Interesting.

 

[Epiphoskei]

God does not break covenants. Israel did though, as the prophets write. The mosaic covenant is done away, and even if it had not been broken, it was mearly a teacher, as Paul writes in Galatians, to lead us to Christ. Now that we are heirs of the promise, we are no longer under the teacher.

 

[cygnusx1]

Here is my idea of Covenant Theology:

G-d does not break His Covenants. Every Covenant He ever made is still in effect. Adam. Noah. Abraham. Israel through Moses. David. New Covenant. ALL OF THESE, simultaneously.

Period.

Certainly the Abrahamic Covenant is ongoing which includes circumcision for Jews , but the Law ' ie, the Mosaic Covenant is fulfilled , the nature of which was a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ.

 

[GeratTzedek]

God does not break covenants. Israel did though, as the prophets write. The mosaic covenant is done away, and even if it had not been broken, it was mearly a teacher, as Paul writes in Galatians, to lead us to Christ. Now that we are heirs of the promise, we are no longer under the teacher.

Human beings break covenant with HaShem all the time. He is merciful and forgiving. It is why He has always offered the option of atonement for those that are repentant, that we may RETURN to covenant.

And so, again, just as YOU or *I* breaking covenant does not negate His grace, neither does Israel breaking covenant negate His grace. His mercy endures forever; He casts our sins into the sea, as far as the east is from the west, and knows them no more.

And KEEPS HIS COVENANTS. With us. And with his People, Israel.

 

[GeratTzedek]

Certainly the Abrahamic Covenant is ongoing which includes circumcision for Jews , but the Law ' ie, the Mosaic Covenant is fulfilled , the nature of which was a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ.

If the ONLY reason for the Law was to TEACH us that we needed a savior... well, honestly, that was kind of obvious when Moshe came down from Sinai and the people had ALREADY made a golden calf. So WHY did Moshe need to go BACK and get a SECOND set of commandments?????????? Wasn't the lesson already learned?

 

[thereselittleflower]

Here is my idea of Covenant Theology:

G-d does not break His Covenants. Every Covenant He ever made is still in effect. Adam. Noah. Abraham. Israel through Moses. David. New Covenant. ALL OF THESE, simultaneously.

Period.

Nope .. sorry, you are dead wrong.

God does not break His covenants, that is true.

He FULFILLS them.

And once they have been fufilled and the covenant has run its course, it is done, finished, ended.

Covenants are conditional. They can be broken by us.


The Old Covenant is done. Its time has come and gone. Paul said it was obsolete - so old it hardly had any life left in it, ready to pass away at any momment, to be no more, in his day. Then came 70AD, and Paul's promise of its final end was made evident by God's judgement on Israel for rejecting the promised Messiah.


The New Covenant has taken its place.

.

 

[thereselittleflower]

Certainly the Abrahamic Covenant is ongoing which includes circumcision for Jews , but the Law ' ie, the Mosaic Covenant is fulfilled , the nature of which was a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ.

Not in Christ. . . there is no Jew or Gentile in Christ . . there is no need for a Jew to be circumcised in Christ.

.

 

[thereselittleflower]

If the ONLY reason for the Law was to TEACH us that we needed a savior... well, honestly, that was kind of obvious when Moshe came down from Sinai and the people had ALREADY made a golden calf. So WHY did Moshe need to go BACK and get a SECOND set of commandments?????????? Wasn't the lesson already learned?

And now that the savior has come, there is no more need for the Law. . . . it has served its purpose and now has no further use . . . it has been abrogated, annuled, repealed. We can do a word study of what Paul said on the matter if you wish.

.

 

[cygnusx1]

Not in Christ. . . there is no Jew or Gentile in Christ . . there is no need for a Jew to be circumcised in Christ.

.

that is only one side of the truth , Gerntiles do not have to be circumcised , nowhere does scripture , not even at the first synod , teach circumcision is banned for Jews or is over ......... even Paul has Timothy circumcised , the covenant of Abraham is twofold... and replacement theology is serious error.

 

[thereselittleflower]

that is only one side of the truth , Gerntiles do not have to be circumcised , nowhere does scripture , not even at the first synod , teach circumcision is banned for Jews or is over ......... even Paul has Timothy circumcised , the covenant of Abraham is twofold... and replacement theology is serious error.

the argument you are presenting is a red herring.

Paul had Timothy circumcised not because Timonthy needed to be circumcised because of his Jewish blood, but so he would not cause a scandel if he entered the temple and the Jews saw he wasn't circumcised.

Paul saw that being circumcised was no longer an issue for anyone.

If one wants to be circumcised, there is no law against it.

There is also now no longer any law requiring it for anyone. . . . . .

It is MAN who requires it now . . .. not God.

And the whole argument against "replacement" theology is a bogus issue. There is false "replacement" theology, such as "British Israel" where a nation replaces Israel.

No nation replaces Israel.


The CHURCH was the next step in God's redemptive plan, what the Jews were supposed to advance into. But because they rejected their Messiah, the good news went to the Gentiles without them (generally speaking). The Church is the FULFILLMENT of what the nation of Israel was only a shadow of.

When Jews turn to Christ, they become Christians. They no longer are Jews practicing Judaism which was a mere shadow of Christianity, which was the reality to come, what the shadow pointed to.

Types and shadows. . . . . types and shsadows end when what they were pointing to, their fulfillment, comes.

If you want to talk about replacement theology, then you have a problem, for Christ Himself "replaced" all that foreshadowed Him . . the passover lamb for instance.

There is legitimate "replacement", and to balk against that is a grave error.

.

 

[GeratTzedek]

Not in Christ. . . there is no Jew or Gentile in Christ . . there is no need for a Jew to be circumcised in Christ.

.

The same verse you quote which says there is no Jew or Gentile also says there is no male nor female. So, when you became a believer, did you become androgynous???? Any body parts fall off? OR.... are you STILL a woman?

IOW, the verse refers to equality under G-d, and not to the disappearence of differentiation. Men and women are equal before G-d, but different. Jew and Gentile are equal before G-d, but different. Just as in marriage a man and a woman become one flesh, but that unity is one of differentiation, SO ALSO in Ekklesia, Jew and gentile become one new man, but it is a unity of differentiation, and not homogenization.

Thus, just as gentiles do not need to become Jews when they become believers, JEWS DO NOT BECOME GENTILES.

Indeed it is WRONG for you to insist they do so. Why? Because G-d has formed a covenant with Israel, and when you sucker Jewish believers into abandoning that covenant, you trick them into sinning.

You will be held responsible.

 

[GeratTzedek]

And now that the savior has come, there is no more need for the Law. . . . it has served its purpose and now has no further use . . . it has been abrogated, annuled, repealed. We can do a word study of what Paul said on the matter if you wish.

.

What do you mean there is no need for law? What in the world do you think is the purpose of the law in the first place? It is guidence and teaching. It is what we are to study for doctrine, for instruction in righteousness, even as gentiles! And for JEWS it is COVENANT. How long? According to Yeshua, until heaven and earth pass away not even the smallest stroke of the Law will pass away. Last time I checked, the earth was still here. Is the earth still there outside your window? I guess the Law is still there too, then!

 

[GeratTzedek]

Nope .. sorry, you are dead wrong.

God does not break His covenants, that is true.

He FULFILLS them.

And once they have been fufilled and the covenant has run its course, it is done, finished, ended.

Covenants are conditional. They can be broken by us.


The Old Covenant is done. Its time has come and gone. Paul said it was obsolete - so old it hardly had any life left in it, ready to pass away at any momment, to be no more, in his day. Then came 70AD, and Paul's promise of its final end was made evident by God's judgement on Israel for rejecting the promised Messiah.


The New Covenant has taken its place.

.

Paul never said it was obsolete. None of the apostles nor Yeshua said it was obsolete. In fact, Yeshua kept it. Paul went to his death insisting he had kept the law and all the traditions. He insisted he was being FALSELY accused, that in fact he DID beleive Jews should follow Moshe, circumsize their sons, and keep the traditions (it was GENTILES he taught to not do those things). James and the believers in Jerusalem even said to Paul, Look at the thousands of Jews who have come to believe and THEY ARE ALL ZEALOTS FOR TORAH!!!!

Obsolete, my foot! Such an idea is irreconcilable with the book of Acts.

If the destruction of the Temple was punishment for the death of Christ, why 70 AD and not sooner? Actually, there were those at the time that believed it had more to do with the martyrdom of James. After all, Jesus FORGAVE THEM.

And with that forgiveness from Christ on the Cross, there can be no blaming of the Jews for his death. Period. End of story. Any statement to that effect is nothing but ANTI-SEMITISM.

The kind of supersessionist stuff you are spouting? It is what fostered the pogroms and the holocaust. Bad doctrine leads to bad actions. I hope you will find it in your heart to reconsider your thoughts.

I should also mention, since you are Catholic, that the Catholic church has officially repudiated supersessionist theology, and supports the ongoing permanent covenant of Israel. For, as Paul says, "the gifts and calling of G-d are irrevocable." You may wish to spend some time speaking with Hebrew Catholics.

 

[GeratTzedek]

that is only one side of the truth , Gerntiles do not have to be circumcised , nowhere does scripture , not even at the first synod , teach circumcision is banned for Jews or is over ......... even Paul has Timothy circumcised , the covenant of Abraham is twofold... and replacement theology is serious error.

Cygnus: so VERY nice to meet you!

 

[GeratTzedek]

When Jews turn to Christ, they become Christians. They no longer are Jews practicing Judaism

Now that's a strange thing for you to say. You see, I attend a synagogue every shabbat loaded with Jews who have faith in Yeshua, and who are very much practicing Judaism. They keep shabbat, they observe kashrut, they know the b'rachot, etc. Basically, they have remained part of the Jewish community, the People, and they aspire to KEEP COVENANT. That is essentially what Judaism is. And if you ask them if they are Christian, they will say NO.

which was a mere shadow of Christianity, which was the reality to come, what the shadow pointed to.

Sheesh, this is the sort of miso-Judaism that really ruins the ethos of Christians. And you wonder why Jews won't listen to you. What arrogance.

Types and shadows. . . . . types and shsadows end when what they were pointing to, their fulfillment, comes.

oh blah blah blah
Christianity is, at its best, gentilized Judaism. And it has lost it's link with Israel, which is why it has lost it's bearing. It is NOT at its best these days.

If you want to talk about replacement theology, then you have a problem, for Christ Himself "replaced" all that foreshadowed Him . . the passover lamb for instance.

He replaced NOTHING. He was quite specific that he did not come to do away with the Law. In fact he said heaven and earth would pass away before even the smallest mark of the Law would pass away. Look outside and see if the earth is still there.

Either accept what Christ said, or admit you are not following him. But puhleeze stop it with the cut and paste Bible. I've so had it with this de-Judaizing of Yeshua.

 

[cygnusx1]

the argument you are presenting is a red herring.

Paul had Timothy circumcised not because Timonthy needed to be circumcised because of his Jewish blood, but so he would not cause a scandel if he entered the temple and the Jews saw he wasn't circumcised.

Paul saw that being circumcised was no longer an issue for anyone.

If one wants to be circumcised, there is no law against it.

There is also now no longer any law requiring it for anyone. . . . . .

It is MAN who requires it now . . .. not God.

And the whole argument against "replacement" theology is a bogus issue. There is false "replacement" theology, such as "British Israel" where a nation replaces Israel.

No nation replaces Israel.


The CHURCH was the next step in God's redemptive plan, what the Jews were supposed to advance into. But because they rejected their Messiah, the good news went to the Gentiles without them (generally speaking). The Church is the FULFILLMENT of what the nation of Israel was only a shadow of.

When Jews turn to Christ, they become Christians. They no longer are Jews practicing Judaism which was a mere shadow of Christianity, which was the reality to come, what the shadow pointed to.

Types and shadows. . . . . types and shsadows end when what they were pointing to, their fulfillment, comes.

If you want to talk about replacement theology, then you have a problem, for Christ Himself "replaced" all that foreshadowed Him . . the passover lamb for instance.

There is legitimate "replacement", and to balk against that is a grave error.

.

so many bogus "bogus" statements .


The Error Of Replacement Theology

 

[cygnusx1]

Cygnus: so VERY nice to meet you!

bless you sister !!

 

[thereselittleflower]

so many bogus "bogus" statements .

I see that there is no valid response to my arguments. That's because there aren't any.

.

 

[GeratTzedek]

I see that there is no valid response to my arguments. That's because there aren't any.

.

What arguments?