Galatians 4 two opposing covenants.

ralliann · Apr 10, 2023

Valletta said:
Circumcision is the sign of that covenant.

Yes, also a seal. It is the distinction between the covenants. The 4th Generation were given the promises of the land and redemption from slavery, Gen 12.
Moses gave them circumcision brought them out. It is distinctly the circumcision Gen 17 where God promise to be made their God, which they denied to keep for their children.
That is the whoredom they bore for forty years, any worship accounted to other Gods.

GDL · Apr 10, 2023

Studyman said:
I wasn't insinuating otherwise my friend. I didn't have much encouragement from others when I was seeking, I'm sorry if it came out wrong. That wasn't my intent to suggest anything otherwise.

Understood and didn't take what you said or respond to it with any suggestion of anything but facts. No offense or defense intended.

Studyman said:
That is what "ALL" Contention in this world's religions is about, Yes? God's instruction in righteousness? EVERY contention in the Bible, from Adam, to the devil itself, is founded on rebellion and disbelief in God and His instruction. This is why we are told to study "to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

Yes, Law is usually contentious.

Studyman said:
I would defer to Paul's words on this question.

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.

So here is Paul, Years into God's New Covenant, that most every religious sect or franchise of this world, who come in Christ's Name, preach is become obsolete as it was the Old Covenant, speaking to both Jew and Gentile in the Body of Christ, teaching that this seemingly innocuous "LAW" which seems to speak only to those men who own an OX, were in Fact, Inspired by the God and Father of the Lord's Christ, specifically for the members of the Body of Christ, AFTER the death and resurrection of HIS Son.

So what "LAW" of God wouldn't apply here? (excepting the Priesthood & sacrifices codes)

I use the same example from Paul when discussing points that show the continuing lawful use of law Paul exhibits and speaks of 1Tim1:8.

Your last question is the work IMO. I mentioned I'm reading a book written by a legal scholar. He's showing examples of the language of Law in Torah that reveal how much of God's Law is structured in the language of wisdom, which suggests it is meant to be pondered, reasoned, work in our minds and spirits in special ways. IOW, we don't have a clue what's truly in it especially if we throw it away in the error that it has no more application.

Studyman said:
I noticed you left off responding to my reply of your marriage covenant comment. I was looking forward to your take on that.

Sorry, I didn't see a question there. It seems God is in the business of cleansing His bride. Then putting her away for her harlotry, Then taking her back under certain terms. First, He made the arrangements. Now she must make them. That's the basic story of the Tablets per one take I read. Read through Hosea 1-3.

Clare73 · Apr 10, 2023

GDL said:
I currently see this just a little differently.

Good for you, because I got that wrong, and completely re-edited it an hour before this was posted.

GDL said:
Some of the verses from Numbers you reference speak of God taking the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the children of Israel. The initial covenant was with the children of Israel who were to be a kingdom of priests.

After the golden calf, this changed. The priesthood went through some phases and ultimately the tribe of Levi - the 22,000 males (Num3:39) were taken into service part of which was to be the protectorate of Aaron and sons and the sanctity of God. Part of this covenant with Levi language is seen in Mal2:5 that seems to tie back to Num25:12-13 (covenant of peace & an everlasting priesthood) where a Levite grandson of Aaron in zeal for the Lord killed 2 idolaters who were literally approaching the door of the tabernacle (Num25:6) as God in wrath was already killing the children of Israel - 24,000 of them - for their idolatry.

GDL · Apr 10, 2023

ralliann said:
Another covenant? It appears the same words were given. 10 words

Yet there is more covenant language in Ex34 after the breaking of the covenant spoken of in Ex24 prior to the golden calf idolatry and after Moses goes back up Mt. Sinai with the new tablets, he had to prepare this time.

ralliann said:
What covenant was made with them prior? Which they broke? From the day they left Egypt
The covenant of circumcision....

This seems to be an answer to what @Studyman said that ended in a quote of Heb8:9, so I'll take it up from that verse.

Heb8:9 speaks of the covenant God made with the children of Israel when He took them out of Egypt. Looking ahead in context to Heb9, it's clear that this is the covenant God made with Israel that included the tabernacle, the Aaronic Priesthood, etc. This is far greater than a circumcision issue. Israel broke every agreement they had with God.

Am I misunderstanding you?

The issue taken into Hebrews as I understand @Studyman is his view that the "Priesthood Covenant" is what was changed per Hebrews. But he can explain better than I.

GDL · Apr 10, 2023

Clare73 said:
EDIT:

The "covenant with Levi" (Mal 2:4-5) refers to Nu 25:10, God's "covenant of peace" (Nu 25:12, Mal 2:5) with Phinehas, grandson of Aaron, to maintain the family of Phinehas in a "lasting priesthood," implicitly a pledge to Israel to provide her forever with a faithful priesthood, of Christ.

Will you explain? Are you getting this from the "lasting priesthood" language?

ralliann · Apr 10, 2023

GDL said:
Yet there is more covenant language in Ex34 after the breaking of the covenant spoken of in Ex24 prior to the golden calf idolatry and after Moses goes back up Mt. Sinai with the new tablets, he had to prepare this time.

This seems to be an answer to what @Studyman said that ended in a quote of Heb8:9, so I'll take it up from that verse.

Heb8:9 speaks of the covenant God made with the children of Israel when He took them out of Egypt. Looking ahead in context to Heb9, it's clear that this is the covenant God made with Israel that included the tabernacle, the Aaronic Priesthood, etc. This is far greater than a circumcision issue. Israel broke every agreement they had with God.

Am I misunderstanding you?

The issue taken into Hebrews as I understand @Studyman is his view that the "Priesthood Covenant" is what was changed per Hebrews. But he can explain better than I.

No, you are not so much misunderstanding me, but scripture of Hebrews. With regards to Hebrews the carnal commands, carnal ordinances have been disannulled by the "new covenant. Circumcision of the heart, no longer genealogical, nor vessels of Gold etc, or worldly earthly tabernacle. It is still a covenant of circumcision but not according to the fleshly elements. Which I never spoke to because it was irrelevant to the question of what covenant they broke.

Clare73 · Apr 10, 2023

GDL said:
Yet there is more covenant language in Ex34 after the breaking of the covenant spoken of in Ex24 prior to the golden calf idolatry and after Moses goes back up Mt. Sinai with the new tablets, he had to prepare this time.
This seems to be an answer to what @Studyman said that ended in a quote of Heb8:9, so I'll take it up from that verse.
Heb8:9 speaks of the covenant God made with the children of Israel when He took them out of Egypt. Looking ahead in context to Heb9, it's clear that this is the covenant God made with Israel that included the tabernacle, the Aaronic Priesthood, etc. This is far greater than a circumcision issue. Israel broke every agreement they had with God.

Am I misunderstanding you?
The issue taken into Hebrews as I understand @Studyman is his view that the "Priesthood Covenant" is what was changed per Hebrews. But he can explain better than I.

The covenant with Phinehas of the tribe of Levi was about his family, to maintain his family as the Levitical priesthood (Nu 25:10-31).

The issue in Heb 7 is not about a particular family, but about the Levitical priesthood itself, on the basis of, under which the Levitical law was given to the people (Heb 7:11).
The priesthood of Melchizedek had no basis in the Mosaic law and, because the Levitical law was "established by" (Edit: "given on the basis of, under") the Levitical priesthood, a change in the Levitical priesthood to the priesthood of Melchizedek meant a change in the law, from the Levitical law given by the Levitical priesthood to the new law given by the new priesthood (Heb 7:12), with Jesus as its eternal High Priest.

So the former regulation (Levitical law given under Levitical priesthood) is set aside because it was weak and useless--Heb 7:18, Ro 8:3
(for the law made nothing perfect)--Heb 7:11, Ro 3:20, 7:7-8, Gal 3:21, Heb 9:9, 10:1,
and a better hope is introduced. . .and with an oath, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: 'You are a priest forever.' "
Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant (Heb 7:13-22). . .the new covenant (Heb 8:8, Jer 31:31).

The Levitical priesthood was changed by the priesthood of Melchizedek, thereby necessitating a change of the Levitical laws given by the Levitical priesthood, to the law given by the priesthood of Melchizedek's eternal High Priest, Jesus of the tribe of Judah.

Clare73 · Apr 10, 2023

GDL said:
Will you explain? Are you getting this from the "lasting priesthood" language?

I'm getting "covenant" from the "covenant of peace" language in both Nu 25:12 and Mal 2:5.

I'm getting the nature of the covenant from the "lasting priesthood" language of Nu 25:13.

ralliann · Apr 10, 2023

Clare73 said:
The covenant with Phinehas of the tribe of Levi was about his family, to maintain his family as the Levitical priesthood (Nu 25:10-31).

The issue in Heb 7 is not about a particular family, but about the Levitical priesthood itself, given to the people on the basis of and under the Mosaic law (Heb 7:11).
The priesthood of Melchizedek had no basis in the Mosaic law and, because the Levitical law was established by the Levitical priesthood, a change in the Levitical priesthood to the priesthood of Melchizedek meant a change in the law, from the Levitical law given by the Levitical priesthood to the new law given by the new priesthood (Heb 7:12), with Jesus as its eternal High Priest.

So the former regulation (Levitical law given by the Levitical priesthood) is set aside because it was weak and useless--Heb 7:18, Ro 8:3
(for the law made nothing perfect)--Heb 7:11, Ro 3:20, 7:7-8, Gal 3:21, Heb 9:9, 10:1,
and a better hope is introduced. . .and with an oath, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: 'You are a priest forever.' "
Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant (Heb 7:13-22). . .the new covenant (Heb 8:8, Jer 31:31).

The Levitical priesthood was changed by the priesthood of Melchizedek, thereby necessitating a change of the Levitical laws given by the Levitical priesthood, to the law given by the priesthood of Melchizedek's eternal High Priest, Jesus of the tribe of Judah.

Bottom line:
Heb 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
What has that to do with a covenant they broke existing prior?

GDL · Apr 11, 2023

ralliann said:
No, you are not so much misunderstanding me, but scripture of Hebrews. With regards to Hebrews the carnal commands, carnal ordinances have been disannulled by the "new covenant. Circumcision of the heart, no longer genealogical, nor vessels of Gold etc, or worldly earthly tabernacle. It is still a covenant of circumcision but not according to the fleshly elements. Which I never spoke to because it was irrelevant to the question of what covenant they broke.

What's a carnal command and a carnal ordinance?

GDL · Apr 11, 2023

Clare73 said:
the Levitical law was established by the Levitical priesthood

The Levites didn't establish law. God is the Lawgiver. Ultimately this is the issue at hand - Law - as usual.

I do understand the Priesthood issues. Thanks for your input.

So not to drift from what the discussion is with @Studyman, as I understand him and he can step in & correct me or any of us if/when he may choose to, his concept is that the Priesthood Covenant of old was ended, but God's Eternal Law continued under the new Great High Priesthood of our Lord. What I've been doing is to simply identify with Him, per his point of view, what this Priesthood Covenant was, to correlate it to the Covenants God made with the children of Israel, and then track all this into Hebrews and wherever else we need to track it into the NC to see how his POV works out.

As you've identified, Hebrews obviously tells us the Law concerning Priesthood was changed and we know there are no more sacrifices, so all that Law has been ended, so is all this the Priesthood Law based in the Priesthood Covenant @Studyman is speaking of? This topic of the Priesthood runs throughout Hebrews virtually from beginning to end.

I'm simply tracking a concept a fellow Christian has to see how it works out Scripturally. Whether it works out or not or needs tweaking, I'm personally leaving open for now while I work on it.

GDL · Apr 11, 2023

Clare73 said:
I'm getting "covenant" from the "covenant of peace" language in both Nu 25:12 and Mal 2:5.

I'm getting the nature of the covenant from the "lasting priesthood" language of Nu 25:13.

Understood, but how are you applying it to Christ, if you are?

Studyman · Apr 11, 2023

ralliann said:
I hope you don't mind my focusing on your post without all the added commentary having nothing to do with this IMO. What covenant was in place prior, that they broke.

What does it matter? The point is, God made an agreement (Covenant) with them, and they accepted His terms of the agreement.

7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him. 8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.

And they broke it in Ex. 32.

7And the LORD said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves:

8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. 9 And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people: 10 Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation.

So Israel was destroyed, right? And God led the Mosesites into the Promised Land?

No, that is not right. Moses pleaded with God to give them another chance, and went up to Him a second time, and cam to a second agreement which was made with them.

This is the Covenant spoken of in Hebrews 8.

9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

So it doesn't matter what Covenant they broke, whether it was the Covenant with Abraham God passed on to Israel or not.

Ex. 32: 30 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the LORD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.

It seems important to establish this Biblical truth.

ralliann said:
Again whatever covenant was in place, prior.

In Gal. 3, Paul is speaking about the LAW that was ADDED, because of Transgressions. A LAW Abraham didn't have. So I will ask you a question. Why did Moses need to "Go up unto the Lord" a 2nd time, if not "because of Transgressions"?

I look forward to your answer.

ralliann said:
True. This was the generation eventually wiped out after 40 years.

But not Caleb and not Joshua. According to Scriptures, why were they allowed to cross the river, while the rest of Israel were not allowed?

ralliann said:
Another covenant? It appears the same words were given. 10 words

Yes, God's Righteousness didn't change just because men chose to reject it. He was still the God who led them out of Sin (Egypt) as it is to this day.

But there were sacrificial "Works" that were ADDED. Here is one example of a big difference between the Covenant Israel Broke, and the Covenant God made with them "because of Transgressions".

This was before the Golden calf.

Ex. 25: 1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 2 Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring me an offering: of every man that giveth it willingly with his heart ye shall take my offering. 3 And this is the offering which ye shall take of them; gold, and silver, and brass, 4 And blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and goats' hair, 5 And rams' skins dyed red, and badgers' skins, and [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]tim wood, 6 Oil for the light, spices for anointing oil, and for sweet incense, 7 Onyx stones, and stones to be set in the ephod, and in the breastplate. 8 And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them.

This was after the Golden calf.

Lev. 1: 1 And the LORD called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock. 3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD. 4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him. 5 And he shall kill the bullock before the LORD: and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

Here is just one example of a LAW "That was ADDED because of Transgressions". The 10 Commandments, or Gods Word defining how to keep them, were NOT "ADDED" because of Transgressions.

It seems important to establish this Biblical Truth, regardless of the religious philosophy which may exist in the Lands God placed us in.

ralliann said:
What covenant was made with them prior? Which they broke? From the day they left Egypt
The covenant of circumcision....
Jos 5:2 At that time the LORD said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time.
3 And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.
4 And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise: All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt.
5 Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had not circumcised.
6 For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, till all the people that were men of war, which came out of Egypt, were consumed, because they obeyed not the voice of the LORD: unto whom the LORD sware that he would not shew them the land, which the LORD sware unto their fathers that he would give us, a land that floweth with milk and honey.
7 And their children, whom he raised up in their stead, them Joshua circumcised: for they were uncircumcised, because they had not circumcised them by the way.
They were rebellious from the day they left Egypt.
See the precedence of the covenant of their fathers
The Sabbath speaks of the Sinai covenant, a sign. The circumcision speaks of the Abrahamic covenant, a sign
Joh 7:22 Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathersand ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man.
The covenant made to the 4th generation of the Circumcision brought them out of Egpyt Gen 15.
Genesis 17, which is from the fathers distinctly is not just the land Gen 15 but Gen 17
I WILL BE THEIR GOD
Ge 17:8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

But this thread is regarding the 2 covenants spoken of in Jer. 31. The Covenant God gave to Israel, "because" they broke His Covenant, and the New Covenant God would make with Israel, "After those days".

Let's establish the Biblical Truth regarding this first and discern the "LAW" that was ADDED "Because" of Transgressions, "Till the SEED should come", spoken of by Paul in Gal. 3, according to Scriptures, then we can move on to Joshua and engage in the Study of Circumcision. Which was not "ADDED" because of Transgressions.

Studyman · Apr 11, 2023

GDL said:
Understood, but how are you applying it to Christ, if you are?

Exactly. Very well stated. What is a Mediator (Priest) for, if it isn't to establish "Peace" between opposing parties?

Mal. 2: 6 The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity. 7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

Isn't this the very purpose of a Priesthood, to turn men away from iniquity, thus reconciling men to God. Which brings to this man what, if not Peace?

Studyman · Apr 11, 2023

ralliann said:
No, you are not so much misunderstanding me, but scripture of Hebrews. With regards to Hebrews the carnal commands, carnal ordinances have been disannulled by the "new covenant.

There is nowhere in the entire Bible, that teaches God's Ten Commandments and His LAW defining how to keep them, are carnal and were abolished or disannulled by God's New Covenant. It is a teaching, and a popular one, but it doesn't come from Scriptures.

Consider what Hebrews 7 says.

15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there ariseth another priest,

Not "Another Law", but another Mediator, not after the similitude of Aaron, but after the similitude of Melchisedec.

16 Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life.

Please answer this question. According to Scriptures, How was a Levite Priest "Made"? By keeping the 10 Commandments? By Loving His Neighbor as himself? By cutting loose skin off the penis? By Humbling Himself before God in obedience for over 20 years? Or was he "made" according to the carnal LAW of the Levitical Priesthood, where men who have infirmity, appoint other men who have infirmity.

17 For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

18 For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.

28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.

I think GDL understands Hebrews more than you give him credit for.

GDL · Apr 11, 2023

Studyman said:
Here is just one example of a LAW "That was ADDED because of Transgressions". The 10 Commandments, or Gods Word defining how to keep them, were NOT "ADDED" because of Transgressions.

I think this is the pivotal point in your argument.

I also think there are a few things we can clean up a bit.

I do see the covenant Israel broke as the one spoken of in Ex19-24. Moses instituted this covenant with blood in Ex24:8
The free will offering specified in Ex25 was to build the tabernacle where God would dwell, and Aaron and sons would serve God as His priests in the tabernacle. Prior to Ex32, this is all just being specified and yet to be implemented.
While Moses was on the mountain with God getting all the terms and laws, Israel broke the covenant with idolatry.
It looks like, as you say, that the covenant terms God was specifying - including the 10C's - were not changed when Moses went back up the mountain in Ex34 after pleading for the people in Ex32.
The only covenant language in Ex34:10 is God covenanting to do marvels such as not seen before in the earth. This is where I think the marriage contract concept comes in. God made the original contract with His terms specified while Moses was on the mountain the first time. Israel committed idolatry (harlotry in essence). The contract was broken - Moses smashed the tablets. The next trip up the mountain Moses needs to bring the tablets and he needs to do the writing - he's there for 40 days apparently doing so (Ex34:28). This is the reinstitution of the marriage - the covenant. which had been broken.
The freewill offering specified by God in Ex25 but never implemented due to the idolatry / covenant breaking is implemented in Ex35 when Moses comes down again with the renewed covenant contract (tablets) in hand.
I'm not doing all the work to compare the specifications given the first time to what was implemented the 2nd time, but the tabernacle gets built and the 10C's are in place, so I'd say God's original terms were probably implemented.

The ADDED due to transgressions is another pivotal point that's still a question for me:

At the moment I don't see the transgressions as the golden calf idolatry. I actually currently see it as more in line with the concept you call "God's Eternal Law". Here's why"
"Transgressions" is a word that means "deviating from an established norm - violation of law" (BDAG)
In Gen26:5 Abraham is said to have kept God's commandments, statutes and laws.
As Scripture continues, we can see law and morality/ethics issues among the Jews and in Egypt - issues of theft, defiling young women, Joseph fleeing adultery, Joseph making law in Egypt, etc... Law is not some non-existent issue and God obviously had given His Law to Abraham.
Then some of these comments - all are prior to Ex20 where God gives His Law to Moses on Mt. Sinai:
- NKJ Ex12:49-50 "One law shall be for the native-born and for the stranger who dwells among you." 50 Thus all the children of Israel did; as the LORD commanded Moses and Aaron, so they did.
- NKJ Ex13:8-10 "And you shall tell your son in that day, saying,`This is done because of what the LORD did for me when I came up from Egypt.' 9 "It shall be as a sign to you on your hand and as a memorial between your eyes, that the LORD'S law may be in your mouth; for with a strong hand the LORD has brought you out of Egypt. 10 "You shall therefore keep this ordinance in its season from year to year.
- NKJ Ex16:4 Then the LORD said to Moses, "Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you. And the people shall go out and gather a certain quota every day, that I may test them, whether they will walk in My law or not.
- NKJ Ex16:28 And the LORD said to Moses, "How long do you refuse to keep My commandments and My laws?
- NKJ Ex16:15-16 And Moses said to his father-in-law, "Because the people come to me to inquire of God. 16 "When they have a difficulty, they come to me, and I judge between one and another; and I make known the statutes of God and His laws."
- NKJ Ex18:19-20 "Listen now to my voice; I will give you counsel, and God will be with you: Stand before God for the people, so that you may bring the difficulties to God. 20 "And you shall teach them the statutes and the laws, and show them the way in which they must walk and the work they must do.

So, what statutes and laws prior to Ex20, if not the statutes and laws God gave to Abraham + any additional ordinances God gave to Israel prior to Ex20?

The nation is growing into a hard to manage size and Jethro, Moses' father-in-law and a Midianite priest (Ex3:1 - Midian a descendant of Abraham Gen25:1) assists Moses with setting up judges in Ex18. So, where does the descendant of Abraham and the priest of Midian get all this knowledge of dealing with law, and what law? Maybe Gen26:5?

From there God is going to start arranging the growing nation as He desires for His purposes:

NKJ Exodus 19:1-8 In the third month after the children of Israel had gone out of the land of Egypt, on the same day, they came to the Wilderness of Sinai. 2 For they had departed from Rephidim, had come to the Wilderness of Sinai, and camped in the wilderness. So Israel camped there before the mountain. 3 And Moses went up to God, and the LORD called to him from the mountain, saying, "Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel: 4 `You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to Myself. 5 `Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. 6 `And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words which you shall speak to the children of Israel." 7 So Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before them all these words which the LORD commanded him. 8 Then all the people answered together and said, "All that the LORD has spoken we will do." So Moses brought back the words of the people to the LORD.

The way I read this, the transgressions/violations of law go back to at minimum Gen26:5 and can certainly include the idolatry of Ex32. But the law including the Aaronic Priesthood and tabernacle and instructions for sacrifices for atonement for sin were given by God from Gen25-31 prior to the golden calf idolatry of Ex32.

IMO this actually strengthens the POV that God's Eternal Law of Righteousness was prior to Moses and even Gal3:19 "transgressions/deviation from a norm/violation of law" is telling us this. And the law added obviously included the Aaronic (son of Levi) Priesthood which later had the tribe of Levi serving it and God (Num3) - so later AKA as the Levitical Priesthood - and the animal sacrifices for sins.

Still working...

ralliann · Apr 11, 2023

GDL said:
What's a carnal command and a carnal ordinance?

Whay it says.

Outward external things that pertain to the flesh.

GDL · Apr 11, 2023

Studyman said:
Exactly. Very well stated. What is a Mediator (Priest) for, if it isn't to establish "Peace" between opposing parties?

Mal. 2: 6 The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity. 7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

Isn't this the very purpose of a Priesthood, to turn men away from iniquity, thus reconciling men to God. Which brings to this man what, if not Peace?

Certainly. Another purpose is to teach God's Law and ways that He teaches them - to bring people to the King and teach His will and ways. There's a reason Christians are referred to as a royal priesthood, kings and priests (1 Pet2:5, 1 Pet2:9; Rev1:6: Rev5:10; Rev20:6).

The Law part is always a battle within Christiandom.

GDL · Apr 11, 2023

ralliann said:
Whay it says.

Outward external things that pertain to the flesh.

So, the carnal commands, carnal ordinances, external things that pertain to the flesh have been disannulled?

Paul still uses law to identify sinful behaviors in 1 Tim1 and to identify works of flesh in Gal5. Christians still commit sins/lawlessness/unrighteousness and must acknowledge them to God for cleansing and forgiveness 1 John1. Christians are told they're not under law if they're walking in Spirit and not doing lusts of flesh Gal5. Paul uses law from Deut25 re: oxen to make his case for supporting God's servants proclaiming His Gospel 1Cor9.

Flesh commands and ordinances were disannulled?

ralliann · Apr 11, 2023

Studyman said:
What does it matter? The point is, God made an agreement (Covenant) with them, and they accepted His terms of the agreement.

7 And Moses came and called for the elders of the people, and laid before their faces all these words which the LORD commanded him. 8 And all the people answered together, and said, All that the LORD hath spoken we will do. And Moses returned the words of the people unto the LORD.

And they broke it in Ex. 32.

7And the LORD said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves:

8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. 9 And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people: 10 Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation.

So Israel was destroyed, right? And God led the Mosesites into the Promised Land?

No, that is not right. Moses pleaded with God to give them another chance, and went up to Him a second time, and cam to a second agreement which was made with them.

This is the Covenant spoken of in Hebrews 8.

9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

So it doesn't matter what Covenant they broke, whether it was the Covenant with Abraham God passed on to Israel or not.

Ex. 32: 30 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the LORD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.

It seems important to establish this Biblical truth.

In Gal. 3, Paul is speaking about the LAW that was ADDED, because of Transgressions. A LAW Abraham didn't have. So I will ask you a question. Why did Moses need to "Go up unto the Lord" a 2nd time, if not "because of Transgressions"?

I look forward to your answer.

But not Caleb and not Joshua. According to Scriptures, why were they allowed to cross the river, while the rest of Israel were not allowed?

Yes, God's Righteousness didn't change just because men chose to reject it. He was still the God who led them out of Sin (Egypt) as it is to this day.

But there were sacrificial "Works" that were ADDED. Here is one example of a big difference between the Covenant Israel Broke, and the Covenant God made with them "because of Transgressions".

This was before the Golden calf.

Ex. 25: 1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 2 Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring me an offering: of every man that giveth it willingly with his heart ye shall take my offering. 3 And this is the offering which ye shall take of them; gold, and silver, and brass, 4 And blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and goats' hair, 5 And rams' skins dyed red, and badgers' skins, and [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]tim wood, 6 Oil for the light, spices for anointing oil, and for sweet incense, 7 Onyx stones, and stones to be set in the ephod, and in the breastplate. 8 And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them.

This was after the Golden calf.

Lev. 1: 1 And the LORD called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock. 3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD. 4 And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him. 5 And he shall kill the bullock before the LORD: and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

Here is just one example of a LAW "That was ADDED because of Transgressions". The 10 Commandments, or Gods Word defining how to keep them, were NOT "ADDED" because of Transgressions.

It seems important to establish this Biblical Truth, regardless of the religious philosophy which may exist in the Lands God placed us in.

But this thread is regarding the 2 covenants spoken of in Jer. 31. The Covenant God gave to Israel, "because" they broke His Covenant, and the New Covenant God would make with Israel, "After those days".

Let's establish the Biblical Truth regarding this first and discern the "LAW" that was ADDED "Because" of Transgressions, "Till the SEED should come", spoken of by Paul in Gal. 3, according to Scriptures, then we can move on to Joshua and engage in the Study of Circumcision. Which was not "ADDED" because of Transgressions.

You asked what covenant they broke that was prior. From the day that they left Egypt, they were not keeping the covenant of circumcision. We know this from Joshua. Genesis 15, was a promise to the 4th generation. Here is the promise of the covenant
THY SEED
Gen 15:13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.

ABRAM, will be dead when this covenant comes into effect
15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.

THE 4th GENERATION
16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.
17 ¶ And it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces.

TO HIS SEED he gives the land
18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land,

This covenant excludes Isaac, Jacob, and the patriarchs. It is a distinct covenant OF CIRCUMCISION Beginning in Genesis 17, which will not become of effect until AFTER the covenant of Circumcision is put into effect. With ABRAHAM, ISAAC, AND THE PATRIARCHS.

The covenant of Genesis 17 is the promise to give ABRAHAM, the land and his seed, and to be their GOD.

Joseph and that generation of the patriarchs would also be dead. It concerned the 4th generation of his seed and Joseph well knew it.

Carry up my bones when God visits you
Gen 50:25 And Joseph took an oath of the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence.
26 So Joseph died, being an hundred and ten years old: and they embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt.

Ex 1:6 And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.

Moses brings the bones of Joseph out of Egypt

Ex 13:19 And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him: for he had straitly sworn the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you; and ye shall carry up my bones away hence with you.

Are you Able to acknowledge these things?

Galatians 4 two opposing covenants.

christian

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

christian

Blood-bought

Blood-bought

christian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

christian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

christian

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency