Hebrews

[Tanakh]

The Letter to the Hebrews (sometimes called The Book of Hebrews) is attributed to the Apostle Paul, although some doubt that he wrote it, but it nonetheless is striking to me, a Jew, because it was written to converts from Judaism to Christianity, Messianic Jews if you will, and so my question is that many Christians will state that the "New Testament" is only a fulfillment of the "Old Testament" and yet the Gospels clearly state that the entire "old law" is made void by Jesus Christ:

"But he (Jesus) is worthy of more "glory" than Moses, as the founder of a house has more "honor" than the house itself." - Hebrews 3:3

"For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second one. But he finds fault with them and says:

"Behold, the days are coming, says the L-rd, when I will conclude a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers the day I took them by the hand to lead them forth from the land of Egypt; for they did not stand by my covenant and I ignored them, says the L-rd. But this is the covenant I will establish with the house of Israel after those days, says the L-rd: I will put my laws in their minds and I will write them upon their hearts. I will be their G-d and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach, each one his fellow citizen and kinsman, saying, "Know the L-rd," for all shall know me, from least to greatest. For I will forgive their evildoing and remember their sins no more."

When he speaks of a "new" covenant, he declares the first one obsolete. And what has become obsolete and has grown old is close to disappearing." - Hebrews 8:7-13

And yet to say that the "first covenant" was not "faultless" implies that G-d screwed up and must therefore, because of the actions of His creation, create a "new covenant" for mankind (obviously logic would dictate mankind will screw this one up as well). Thus if G-d is all-knowing then why would he not have forseen the "old law" fall apart and therefore require a "new law"? Why not just go right for the law that was to be eternal anyway, namely the "law of Christ"? It seems to me that Christianity got the "first covenant" all wrong and went for something more to their liking. After all the "old law" states:

"He (Moses) took the Book of the Covenant and read it in earshot of the people, and they said, "Everything that HASHEM has said, we will do and we will obey!" Moses took the blood and threw it upon the people, and he said, "Behold the blood of the covenant that HAHSEM sealed with you concerning all these matters." - Exodus 24:7-8

"I will ratify My covenant between Me and You and between your offspring after you, throughout their generations, as an everlasting covenant, to be a G-d to you and to your offspring after you......" - Genesis 17:7

So did G-d change or did His creation?

 

[anisavta]

No G~d did not exchange an old covenant for a new one.
My suggestion for you is to go on line and pull up The Complete Jewish Bible by David Stern and read Hebrews from that. It will give you a Jewish perspective on a book written by a Jew for a Jew.
The "old" covenant and the "new" covenant are a seamless piece of cloth.

 

[Tanakh]

No G~d did not exchange an old covenant for a new one.
My suggestion for you is to go on line and pull up The Complete Jewish Bible by David Stern and read Hebrews from that. It will give you a Jewish perspective on a book written by a Jew for a Jew.
The "old" covenant and the "new" covenant are a seamless piece of cloth.

And yet if G-d did not "exchange" the "old" law for a "new" law then why would the Gospel state that the "first covenant" was now "obsolete"? There is no doubt a contradiction in terms between Judaism and Christianity on the issue of the "new Israel" versus the "old Israel" and so how can the covenant be a "seamless piece of cloth" when the Gospels contradicte what the Torah says? The Torah states over and over again that the covenant with Israel is unique and will remain so for all time. Nowhere does the text state that the biblical mandate will end and in fact states quite clearly that the "Laws of Moses" will be in place forever.

This thread is not meant to antagonize Christianity or CF but is rather just a way in finding out what the real connection is between Judaism and "Jewish Messianic Christians".

 

[johnd]

Read Galatians as a "sister" text to Hebrews... which is a commentary on Jeremiah 31:31-34.

Galatians 3:24-25
24 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith.
25 Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.

Which does not leave us lawless. Rather, the initial law was to lead us to the law of God (namely Messiah):

1 Corinthians 9:19-21
19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.
20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law.
21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law.

 

[johnd]

Consider an omniscient mind granting feeble minded humans choice over eternal consequences and dealing with them on that basis.. then you'll know why the Lord went about things the way that he did.

 

[Steve Petersen]

The Letter to the Hebrews (sometimes called The Book of Hebrews) is attributed to the Apostle Paul, although some doubt that he wrote it, but it nonetheless is striking to me, a Jew, because it was written to converts from Judaism to Christianity, Messianic Jews if you will, and so my question is that many Christians will state that the "New Testament" is only a fulfillment of the "Old Testament" and yet the Gospels clearly state that the entire "old law" is made void by Jesus Christ:

"But he (Jesus) is worthy of more "glory" than Moses, as the founder of a house has more "honor" than the house itself." - Hebrews 3:3

"For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second one. But he finds fault with them and says:

"Behold, the days are coming, says the L-rd, when I will conclude a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers the day I took them by the hand to lead them forth from the land of Egypt; for they did not stand by my covenant and I ignored them, says the L-rd. But this is the covenant I will establish with the house of Israel after those days, says the L-rd: I will put my laws in their minds and I will write them upon their hearts. I will be their G-d and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach, each one his fellow citizen and kinsman, saying, "Know the L-rd," for all shall know me, from least to greatest. For I will forgive their evildoing and remember their sins no more."

When he speaks of a "new" covenant, he declares the first one obsolete. And what has become obsolete and has grown old is close to disappearing." - Hebrews 8:7-13

And yet to say that the "first covenant" was not "faultless" implies that G-d screwed up and must therefore, because of the actions of His creation, create a "new covenant" for mankind (obviously logic would dictate mankind will screw this one up as well). Thus if G-d is all-knowing then why would he not have forseen the "old law" fall apart and therefore require a "new law"? Why not just go right for the law that was to be eternal anyway, namely the "law of Christ"? It seems to me that Christianity got the "first covenant" all wrong and went for something more to their liking. After all the "old law" states:

"He (Moses) took the Book of the Covenant and read it in earshot of the people, and they said, "Everything that HASHEM has said, we will do and we will obey!" Moses took the blood and threw it upon the people, and he said, "Behold the blood of the covenant that HAHSEM sealed with you concerning all these matters." - Exodus 24:7-8

"I will ratify My covenant between Me and You and between your offspring after you, throughout their generations, as an everlasting covenant, to be a G-d to you and to your offspring after you......" - Genesis 17:7

So did G-d change or did His creation?

There are several issues here that cannot really be very well addressed here. I would like to steer you to the Hebrews series by Daniel Lancaster.

 

[Hentenza]

The Letter to the Hebrews (sometimes called The Book of Hebrews) is attributed to the Apostle Paul, although some doubt that he wrote it, but it nonetheless is striking to me, a Jew, because it was written to converts from Judaism to Christianity, Messianic Jews if you will, and so my question is that many Christians will state that the "New Testament" is only a fulfillment of the "Old Testament" and yet the Gospels clearly state that the entire "old law" is made void by Jesus Christ:

"But he (Jesus) is worthy of more "glory" than Moses, as the founder of a house has more "honor" than the house itself." - Hebrews 3:3

"For if that first covenant had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second one. But he finds fault with them and says:

"Behold, the days are coming, says the L-rd, when I will conclude a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their fathers the day I took them by the hand to lead them forth from the land of Egypt; for they did not stand by my covenant and I ignored them, says the L-rd. But this is the covenant I will establish with the house of Israel after those days, says the L-rd: I will put my laws in their minds and I will write them upon their hearts. I will be their G-d and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach, each one his fellow citizen and kinsman, saying, "Know the L-rd," for all shall know me, from least to greatest. For I will forgive their evildoing and remember their sins no more."

When he speaks of a "new" covenant, he declares the first one obsolete. And what has become obsolete and has grown old is close to disappearing." - Hebrews 8:7-13

And yet to say that the "first covenant" was not "faultless" implies that G-d screwed up and must therefore, because of the actions of His creation, create a "new covenant" for mankind (obviously logic would dictate mankind will screw this one up as well). Thus if G-d is all-knowing then why would he not have forseen the "old law" fall apart and therefore require a "new law"? Why not just go right for the law that was to be eternal anyway, namely the "law of Christ"? It seems to me that Christianity got the "first covenant" all wrong and went for something more to their liking. After all the "old law" states:

"He (Moses) took the Book of the Covenant and read it in earshot of the people, and they said, "Everything that HASHEM has said, we will do and we will obey!" Moses took the blood and threw it upon the people, and he said, "Behold the blood of the covenant that HAHSEM sealed with you concerning all these matters." - Exodus 24:7-8

"I will ratify My covenant between Me and You and between your offspring after you, throughout their generations, as an everlasting covenant, to be a G-d to you and to your offspring after you......" - Genesis 17:7

So did G-d change or did His creation?

Hi Tanakah,

This is an interesting topic. As Christians, we do not believe that the law was made "obsolete" but was "fulfilled" by Christ. There is a big difference. Jesus, in the sermon of the mount, clearly stated that none of the words of the law will pass away (paraphrased). God never changes. He is immutable.

 

[dvd_holc]

from CJB:
7 Indeed, if the first covenant had not given ground for faultfinding, there would have been no need for a second one. 8 For God does find fault with the people when he says, "'See! The days are coming,' says ADONAI, 'when I will establish over the house of Isra'el and over the house of Y'hudah a new covenant. 9 "'It will not be like the covenant which I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by their hand and led them forth out of the land of Egypt; because they, for their part, did not remain faithful to my covenant; so I, for my part, stopped concerning myself with them,' says ADONAI.

 

[dvd_holc]

Daniel Lancaster points out in his Hebrew series that in Hebrews 8 and else where there is a word play on Protos and Deuteros which the author also compares the outer and inner chambers of the House of God. I will point out when God first gave the covenant Moses broke the tablets which signified that Israel broke the covenant and they already needed a Deuteros which has been translated as afrerward or again...it is important to note that both in Exodus and then when it was renewed in Deuteronomy with the stipulations that afterward...after the exile happens the covenant would established...This was elaborated on by other prophets which we believe was cut by the death of Jesus.

 

[visionary]

And yet to say that the "first covenant" was not "faultless" implies that G-d screwed up

as for the fault... it was not in the covenant... but in them... and now today.. it is in us...

Hebrews 8:8
For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

 

[Heber]

And yet if G-d did not "exchange" the "old" law for a "new" law then why would the Gospel state that the "first covenant" was now "obsolete"?

Semantics! Read Sha'ul at the of Romans 3 and again in Acts 24 - he believed and taught the Law, as did Yeshua, who also stated that the Law will never pass away etc.

The whole of the latter covenant is totally dependent on the earlier covenant. You will never, ever begin to understand Yeshua and his teaching, or Sha'ul, or the others, unless you yourself have a good understanding of the whole of the earlier testament. It say that all scripture is G_d breathed etc etc. What do we mean by that? That the scriptures they had - the earlier covenant - is G_d breathed. It cannot mean the latter covenant because that was not around then.

G_d did produce a new covenant - he says that he will write not on our hearts of stone but on hearts of flesh - the new covenant is the earlier covenant writ large in our hearts. This is ALL that is 'new' about it - at root, it is the same Law! There are some chages in emphasis and Yeshua and Sha'ul made some halachic decisions about how best to understand it, but they didn't change it or kill it off, as the above texts will confirm. I know it doesn't seem like it today, but that doesn't change G_d's intention that it should be like this, one bit. He wanted his Law written not on stones that can be easily broken, but on our hearts. This is why it speaks of a circumcision of the heart, not of the flesh, in recognition that the Law was to be there in our hearts and the spiritual circumcision of our hearts by the Ruach HaKodesh, is what makes all, (all true believers in Yeshua) of one family. Previously it was the circumcision of the body that showed you were his chosen people, now it is that but also circumcision of the heart, as well, not just instead of. This was what Sha'ul spoke of in Romans 11, and Kefa spoke about in Acts 10 - that G_d was grafting the believing Gentiles into the root (his Law), made equal in G_d's sight and with, no longer, a distinction between Jew and Gentile, slave or free, man or woman. If you have the Law engraved in your heart, you are his sons, of his family, chosen people, royal priesthood etc etc. if you only have circumcision of the flesh then you need an upgrade which G_d offers freely through Yeshua. Mind you, you can keep the circumcision of the body but life with G_d will be a bit like eating a toffee with the paper on (well, actually he speaks in less friendly terms about a valley of dead bones) so you may, at times, get a bit of the full flavour working through, but most of the time it will gum the works and taste a not a bit like the same toffee everyone else is eating.

In the same way Yeshua praised the zeal of the Pharisees - everyone, he said, should be at least as zealous as them. The distinction being that they wanted a written Law, with endless extensions and caveats, and Yeshua came to teach that the law must be in your heart, so that you live it automatically, it comes as second nature to breathing, it is with you when you lie down and when you get up, it is there when you go out and when you come in etc etc. The Law must become you, not you becoming the Law!

Without the Law there is no need for grace and no need for faith! We need faith to believe that because of Yeshua's vicarious death, when we do break G_d's Law at any point (remember - if you break one you break them all) he will pour out grace to cover those sins, provded we repent. See http://www.christianforums.com/t7377091/ for further info on this point, to save me retyping everything again.

I could go on further but I have to go to a meeting; I hope you can see what I hoped to say!

 

[Tanakh]

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. I tell you, unless your righteouness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven." - Matthew 5:17-20

These verses are very interesting because it seems to say that the "law" will not pass away until "all things have taken place" which to me points to Jesus' crucifixion and so when he is executed and is resurrected then the law will pass away and his law will surpass it.

"But now the righteouness of G-d has been manifested apart from the law, though testified to by the law and the prophets, the righteouness of G-d through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction; all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of G-d. They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Jesus Christ, whom G-d set forth as an expiation, through faith, by his blood, to prove his righteousness because of the forgiveness of sins previously committed, through the forbearance of G-d - to prove his righteousness in the present time, that he might be righteous and justify the one who has faith in Jesus.

What occasion is there then for boasting? It is ruled out. On what principle, that of works? No, rather on the principle of faith. For we consider that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. Does G-d belong to Jews alone? Does he not belong to Gentiles, too? Yes, also to Gentiles. For G-d is one and will justify the circumcised on the basis of faith and the uncircumcised through faith. Are we then annulling the law by this faith? Of course Not! On the contrary, we are supporting the law." - Romans 3:21-31

If Paul is saying that the law (and when I say "law" I mean the Tanakh) is not anulled by faith in Jesus Christ then how can a Jew be a Jew? Now granted I say this on the basis that if the "New Testament" fulfilled the "Old Testament" through an act of faith in Jesus Christ then to what degree should Jews accept that law on the basis of faith? Jews have always understood that humanity must believe in G-d (which takes an act of faith) and so we have always mantained that a Gentile will go to heaven so long as they follow the 7 laws of Noah which G-d instituted for every man and woman on earth for all time to come:

1. Do not murder
2. Do not steal
3. Do not worship false gods
4. Do not practice sexual immorality
5. Do not eat the limb of an animal before it is killed (in other words be kind to animals)
6. Do not curse G-d
7. Set up courts and bring offenders to justice

Of course one does not need to accept the existence of G-d to fulfill these commandments except one, for how can one fulfill #6 if one does not believe in G-d? But again these laws are ingrained in people from childhood but the evil inclination to do evil is also present at a young age as well.

 

[Heber]

So, Tanakh - you believe there is no such thing as grace and faith?

All things have manifestly NOT passed away with Yeshua - see the references to this concept in Revelation.

 

[cyberlizard]

just for Tanakh, let me recommend a set of 18 mp3 studies on the book of Hebrews which argues very well for not only Torah observance amongst Messianic Jews, but more rigid observance.

at least give them the benefit of the doubt.

They are by an author called Tom Lancaster and can be found here at this link.


Steve

 

[Tanakh]

So, Tanakh - you believe there is no such thing as grace and faith?

All things have manifestly NOT passed away with Yeshua - see the references to this concept in Revelation.

I believe in grace and faith through the Law of Moses, not the law of Jesus Christ so I therefore cannot accept the notion that Jesus is G-d nor can I accept him as the Messiah on the basis of faith. To me the Torah is eternal and nothing can take away nor add to it and so the basis of faith and grace in the Law of G-d must, at least for us Jews, be found only and fully in the Torah which was given to the Hebrews at Sinai.

"Here, then," said the L-rd, "is the covenant I will make. Before the eyes of all your people I will work such marvels as have never been wrought in any nation anywhere on earth, so that this people among whom you live may see how awe-inspiring are the deeds which I, the L-rd, will do at your side. But you, on your part, must keep the commandments I am giving you today." - Exodus 34:10-11

"You are all now standing before the L-rd, your G-d - your chiefs and judges, your elders and officials, and all of the men of Israel, together with your wives and children and the aliens who live in your camp, down to those who hew wood and draw water for you - that you may enter into the covenant of the L-rd, your G-d, which He concluded with you today under this sanction of a curse; so that He may now establish you as His people and He may be your G-d, as He promised you and as He swore to your fathers Abraham, Issac and Jacob; it is just as much with those who are not here among us today as it is with those of us who are now here present before the L-rd, our G-d." - Deuteronomy 29:9-14

The Torah itself states that the Laws of G-d, given to Moses, are binding for all time and Jews were selected to perform those laws but as for the Gentiles they are required to follow the Noahide laws and if they can do just that, which is not asking a lot, then they will have a share in Olam Ha-Bah (the World to come).

 

[Heber]

Mmmm interesting answer - far removed from your first post, it seems.

 

[Tanakh]

Mmmm interesting answer - far removed from your first post, it seems.

On what point is my response "far removed" from my first post?

 

[Heber]

On what point is my response "far removed" from my first post?

These verses are very interesting because it seems to say that the "law" will not pass away until "all things have taken place" which to me points to Jesus' crucifixion and so when he is executed and is resurrected then the law will pass away and his law will surpass it

You said, here, that the law will pass away. Grace is given only on those occasions when we break G_d's law - any of it, as Yeshua said (if you break one you break them all (613)). Yeshua did not bring in any new law, as he and Sha'ul says - the Law stands, not a jot or the flick of the pen will change, I believe in everything in accord with the Law and the prophets! Those comments seem pretty conclusive.

Your post above shows no need for grace because you say the law is now superceded - later you say you believe in grace! How can you have it both ways round?

 

[SGM4HIM]

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven. I tell you, unless your righteouness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter into the kingdom of heaven." - Matthew 5:17-20

These verses are very interesting because it seems to say that the "law" will not pass away until "all things have taken place" which to me points to Jesus' crucifixion and so when he is executed and is resurrected then the law will pass away and his law will surpass it.

Have all things taken place that have been described in the Law & Prophets(Tanakh)?

Most Jews and Christians I have spoken with believe there's more ahead to be fulfilled whether it be first or 2nd appearance.

Some believe Jesus was not adding to or comming up with a different gospel and he was bringing the proper meaning (fulfilling) to it. He is not the End of the Law but the Goal of it.
David Bivin wrote" Understanding the difficult words of Jesus" It goes into some of the idioms in Matthew 5:17. for those interested but don't have the book, here's a good article that some while find interesting. www.beittikvah.us/Tapes/notes/6-Language%20and%20Idioms.pdf.

the good stuff is around pages 8-10

 

[Heber]

Have all things taken place that have been described in the Law & Prophets(Tanakh)?

No.