• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is Supersessionism really a controversial position?

Dec 16, 2011
5,214
2,557
59
Home
Visit site
✟251,766.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
My opinion is that the Old Covenant is still in force, side by side with the New Covenant, like two trains running parallel to each other. The main problem is that once the New Testament train tracks were built and became parallel with the Old, the passengers on the Old Train have been in need of switching over, since the Old will run out of track and not reach the final destination on its own. Everyday, both trains stop at the same stations along the way. Passengers on the Old train will have to voluntarily decide if they want to switch to the New train.

So, in some sense, Jews still are the first people of God, and are under the Blessings and Curses of the Old Law. The problem is that the Old Law tells Jews to "pay attention to the Prophet who is to come," and a good number of them have failed to do so. Some, since the time of Jesus, have paid attention and realized that Jesus was the Prophet, as well as the Messiah, as well as the Fullfiller of the requirements of the Old Law.

They (the Jews) were Israel; now we all can be through Jesus the Messiah.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid
The Old Covenant can by no means still be in force, because this would require the existence of a Jewish temple, and every firstborn male child born to couples would need to be brought to the temple to be offered to God, and the sacrifice of a young lamb or two birds made upon the altar. Here is the Old Covenant commandment made in this regard: https://oca.org/readings/daily/2017/02/02/1

This is merely one example. Many prescriptions of Mosaic law are not practiced by anyone, including Jews. The Old Covenant is fulfilled in the New Testament in Christ's blood. We don't sacrifice baby sheep and doves on altars anymore.
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Feel'n the Burn of Philosophy!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,962
11,708
Space Mountain!
✟1,380,449.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The Old Covenant can by no means still be in force, because this would require the existence of a Jewish temple, and every firstborn male child born to couples would need to be brought to the temple to be offered to God, and the sacrifice of a young lamb or two birds made upon the altar. Here is the Old Covenant commandment made in this regard: Scripture Readings

This is merely one example. Many prescriptions of Mosaic law are not practiced by anyone, including Jews. The Old Covenant is fulfilled in the New Testament in Christ's blood. We don't sacrifice baby sheep and doves on altars anymore.

I realize a lot of people will disagree with me, but I'm not seeing that the Temple has to be present for the Old Law to be in force. In fact, I would say that the fact the Temple was destroyed in AD70 demonstrates that the Law is in force.....just not in the way, or with the emphasis that most people assume it will be seen. It is a warning, not a mere consolation to Christians.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Soyeong
Upvote 0

FaithfulPilgrim

Eternally Seeking
Feb 8, 2015
455
121
South Carolina
✟54,849.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
So are you saying Jews should become Christians but retain their specific Jewish identity? Wasn't this condemned in the Book of Acts as the Judaizer heresy?[/QUOTE

Yes and no. I see nothing wrong with observing the Sabbatj and practicing other Jewish customs and traditions, and supposedly Paul was a Torah observant Jew even after his conversion.

The problem was that some Jews were demanding that Gentiles keep the Jewish laws in order to be saved. There is nothing wrong with it if a person keeps Jewish law out of his own free will and does not believe he will get into heaven or is somehow religiously superior because of it.
 
Upvote 0
Dec 16, 2011
5,214
2,557
59
Home
Visit site
✟251,766.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I realize a lot of people will disagree with me, but I'm not seeing that the Temple has to be present for the Old Law to be in force. In fact, I would say that the fact the Temple was destroyed in AD70 demonstrates that the Law is in force.....just not in the way, or with the emphasis that most people assume it will be seen. It is a warning, not a mere consolation to Christians.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid
I don't think that Jews are sacrificing baby sheep, pigeons, or doves upon altars these days. So I don't believe the Old Law to still be in force in this way. Animal sacrifice, in Judaism, isn't practiced anymore to the best of my knowledge. Is it?
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Feel'n the Burn of Philosophy!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,962
11,708
Space Mountain!
✟1,380,449.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I don't think that Jews are sacrificing baby sheep, pigeons, or doves upon altars these days. So I don't believe the Old Law to still be in force in this way. Animal sacrifice, in Judaism, isn't practiced anymore to the best of my knowledge. Is it?

True. They're not still making sacrifices at this moment in time as far as I know; at least not IN the synagogues, anyway. But then you'll have to ask yourself: After the Destruction of the 1st Jewish Temple, and a majority of Jewish people were Exiled in Babylon, were they still under the Law or not? OR did their having no standing Temple mean the Law was abrogated until another Temple was to be built by Herod?
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Soyeong
Upvote 0
Dec 16, 2011
5,214
2,557
59
Home
Visit site
✟251,766.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
True. They're not still making sacrifices at this moment in time as far as I know; at least not IN the synagogues, anyway. But then you'll have to ask yourself: After the Destruction of the 1st Jewish Temple, and a majority of Jewish people were Exiled in Babylon, were they still under the Law or not? OR did their having to standing Temple mean the Law was abrogated until another Temple was to be built by Herod?
If they were under the Old Law, you have to ask yourself why they don't just build sanctuaries with altars and offer their sacrifices, with their burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings (animals) as prescribed under the Levitical priesthood. Point is, rabbinical Judaism is not Judaism as under the Mosaic Law. It is a week remnant of what Judaism was, whereas in the Orthodox Church, sacrifice is still enacted upon our altars as the central aspect of Faith in God, as it was in Judaism in the temple sanctuary. Ours is a bloodless sacrifice because the Lamb Who takes away the sins of the world, once and for all, is the Eternal Christ. The Church is Israel offering its Lamb of God in the temple. There is no other.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel9v9

Christian Forums Staff
Chaplain
Site Supporter
Jun 5, 2016
2,147
1,832
40
London
Visit site
✟601,846.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
I'm new to this terminology, but it sounds about right to me, though I'm not aware of all of the implications. At least our Lord Jesus Christ declares so in Matthew 5:17.

But one thing that comes to mind is the early church's attitude towards Judaism. In the Didache we can see people from a Jewish background finding their place as a Christian congregation in a Jewish (and Roman) society - a complex thing - there are things they deliberately do differently from the other Jews in order to be set apart. They fast on different days and they are encouraged to pray the Lord's Prayer instead of the normal Jewish prayers (which other Jews could not).

Here's a quick reference:

"And let not your fastings be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and the fifth day of the week; but do ye keep your fast on the fourth and on the preparation (the sixth) day. Neither pray ye as the hypocrites, but as the Lord commanded in His Gospel, thus pray ye: Our Father, which art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name; Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done, as in heaven, so also on earth; give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our debt, as we also forgive our debtors; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one; for Thine is the power and the glory for ever and ever. Three times in the day pray ye so."

Here we see they boldly refer to the other Jews as "hypocrites", a forceful language which is also found in Scripture: Matthew 23 Revelation 3:9

I don't think the early church was aggressive in a hostile sense, but it was bold in declaring its independence from Judaism, because the Jews rejected the Messiah and so the Jewish faith is viewed as dead and superficial, where as Christianity carries on as a spiritual Israel.
This makes sense to me the way the Word talks about Christians being grafted into the Kingdom of God in Romans 11
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Feel'n the Burn of Philosophy!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
24,962
11,708
Space Mountain!
✟1,380,449.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If they were under the Old Law, you have to ask yourself why they don't just build sanctuaries with altars and offer their sacrifices, with their burnt offerings and whole burnt offerings (animals) as prescribed under the Levitical priesthood. Point is, rabbinical Judaism is not Judaism as under the Mosaic Law. It is a week remnant of what Judaism was, whereas in the Orthodox Church, sacrifice is still enacted upon our altars as the central aspect of Faith in God, as it was in Judaism in the temple sanctuary. Ours is a bloodless sacrifice because the Lamb Who takes away the sins of the world, once and for all, is the Eternal Christ. The Church is Israel offering its Lamb of God in the temple. There is no other.

I'm not in disagreement with you about there being "no other." You're right; Jesus is the only way--which is my point.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid
 
  • Like
Reactions: truefiction1
Upvote 0

stanria

Active Member
Jan 31, 2017
42
26
Earth
✟29,125.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm new to this terminology, but it sounds about right to me, though I'm not aware of all of the implications. At least our Lord Jesus Christ declares so in Matthew 5:17.

Matthew 5:17 and Romans 11 were the two scriptures I came here to mention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
33,525
20,806
Orlando, Florida
✟1,521,727.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
So if any man tries to deprive you of the privilege of obeying God's command by faith to keep kosher and that you should instead feel free to eat what is an abomination to Him

But in light of the righteousness of Christ, keeping kosher could be an unnecessary burden, even if one were a Jew (Galatians chapter 5, for instance, hints that circumcision, the most outward sign of obedience to the Law of Moses, could undermine faith in the righteousness of Christ).

The Bible prophesies a times when a 3rd temple will be built and when offerings will resume (Ezekiel 44-46).

This fits with Christian Zionism, a position I do not agree with. The temple of God is with men. This is not an historical reality yet to unfold, but a mystical reality present and fulfilled in the Church that will be plainly manifest at the parousia
 
Upvote 0

Citizen of the Kingdom

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 31, 2006
44,402
14,528
Vancouver
Visit site
✟477,376.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Christ is the New Israel, Israel no longer refers to the Hebrew people.
Hebrew means river crosser. True Christians have crossed a spiritual river. They have made sacrifice a reasonable to service to obtained the mind of Christ. The book to the Hebrews is a 5-fold warning of the dangers of returning to materialism.
 
Upvote 0

Citizen of the Kingdom

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 31, 2006
44,402
14,528
Vancouver
Visit site
✟477,376.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
His promises to them specifically that have not been fulfilled pre-Christ are now promises to the body of Christ, the Church. I actually spoke with my Priest about this.


He chose that nation to reveal himself as the one true God, but now he brought the whole world into his graces. I see the Jewish faith as sort of an...anachronism. The Jews keep the law so that the Messiah will come but he already came. They should become Christian. That doesn't mean that they should give up their heritage just like my ancestors didn't when they stopped being English and Irish pagans.
They have become the uncircumcised of heart.
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,661
4,681
Hudson
✟347,695.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
The Old Covenant can by no means still be in force, because this would require the existence of a Jewish temple, and every firstborn male child born to couples would need to be brought to the temple to be offered to God, and the sacrifice of a young lamb or two birds made upon the altar. Here is the Old Covenant commandment made in this regard: Scripture Readings

This is merely one example. Many prescriptions of Mosaic law are not practiced by anyone, including Jews. The Old Covenant is fulfilled in the New Testament in Christ's blood. We don't sacrifice baby sheep and doves on altars anymore.

Was the Old Covenant still in force when the Israelites were in exile in Babylon and didn't have access to the temple?
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,661
4,681
Hudson
✟347,695.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
But in light of the righteousness of Christ, keeping kosher could be an unnecessary burden, even if one were a Jew

God said that what He commanded was for His people's own good (Deuteronomy 6:24, Deuteronomy 10:13), so if you believe that what God said is true, then how can you consider what is for our own good to be an unnecessary burden? According to 1 John 5:3, the commands of God are not burdensome. According to 1 Peter 1:13-16, as part of the New Covenant we are told to have a holy conduct for God is holy, which is a reference to Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to have a holy conduct, which included keeping kosher (Leviticus 11:44-45). So keeping kosher is not an unnecessary burden, but rather living according to the holiness of our God is something that we should delight in doing by faith because we trust Him about how we should live, as Paul did (Romans 3:31, Romans 7:22) and in accordance with the example that Messiah set for his followers to follow.

(Galatians chapter 5, for instance, hints that circumcision, the most outward sign of obedience to the Law of Moses, could undermine faith in the righteousness of Christ).

As I explained in that post, the issue in Galatians was that a group of Jews were teaching that Gentiles needed to become Jewish proselytes involving the process of circumcision and to live as Jews according to their oral laws, rulings, traditions, and fences in order to become saved. So there a distinction between God requiring circumcision as a sign of the covenant and man requiring circumcision in order to become circumcised in order to become saved, and we must be careful not to mistake something that was only against obey the laws of men and being against obeying the Law of God. If I were saying that we need to become circumcised and keep kosher in order to become saved, then I would be undermining faith in the righteousness of Christ because the one and only way to become saved is through faith in him, but God never command those things for that purpose, so trying to become saved by obeying God's commands has always been a legalistic perversion of them.

This fits with Christian Zionism, a position I do not agree with. The temple of God is with men. This is not an historical reality yet to unfold, but a mystical reality present and fulfilled in the Church that will be plainly manifest at the parousia

Ezekiel talks about animal offerings being made in the temple, so I do not see how you can avoid literal interpretation.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

food4thought

Loving truth
Site Supporter
Jul 9, 2002
2,929
725
51
Watervliet, MI
✟406,829.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
It's like you don't understand what I and the article is saying. Nothing promised to Israel has changed, WHO Israel is has changed because the Jews rejected God.

No, it has not changed entirely. True, the church is called spiritual Israel in one passage, I forget where, but look at this passage and try to make it about the church:

For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery--so that you will not be wise in your own estimation--that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, "THE DELIVERER WILL COME FROM ZION, HE WILL REMOVE UNGODLINESS FROM JACOB." "THIS IS MY COVENANT WITH THEM, WHEN I TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS." From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.
(Romans 11:25-29 NASB)

There is no doubt that that passage is referring to literal sons of Israel. Eventually, God will deal with Israel again. A remnant of Israel WILL come to worship Jesus in the last days.
 
Upvote 0

jerry kelso

Food For Thought
Mar 13, 2013
4,846
238
✟119,343.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
I'll be honest I didn't even know this word until I went down the Wikipedia rabbit hole.

Supersessionism is the idea that before Christ came Judaism was the true faith but when Christ was born, lived, performed miracles, was crucified for our sins and resurrected he completed Judaism since Christ is the Messiah that the Jewish people had been awaiting and now Christianity is the truth faith.


I thought that this was just common sense, but apparently it's controversial in some circles because it denies the current validity of the Jewish faith. I don't get that, since of course if Christ is the truth then ipso facto non-Christian religions are not.


I'm Eastern Orthodox by the way.


What's your opinion on this?

khristosaneste,

1. There are different types of sessionism.
It concerns replacement theology of the church replacing Israel's earthly callings in the millennial reign.

2. 2 Samuel 7:4-16; 1 Chronicles 28:2-9 Kingdom forever conditioned on obedience.

3. Isaiah 2:2-4 Prophecy of Israel being at the head of the nations in the future kingdom reign where the law will go forth out of Zion.

4. Isaiah 9:6-7 The government shall be on his shoulders did not happen in Jesus ministry to the Jews under the KoH and the KoG message under the age of the law of Moses which the Gentiles were never under to begin with.

5. Romans 11:25-29 is about all Israel being saved to fulfill their gifts and callings which are eternal concerning the land and the Kingdom.

6. The church is a different age and we are being trained right now for the Kingdom 2 Timothy 2:12; if we suffer we shall reign.
Israel has to be purged because of being backslidden.

7. The new covenant replaced the old covenant Matthew 26:28; Hebrews 8:6-7.
Jeremiah 31:31-34; Hebrews 8:7-13 has not been made with the physical nation of Israel.
Many Jews are atheists and don't believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world.

8. Sessionism for Messianic Jews is more about the New Covenant being a continuation of the redemptive story and so the law was not abolished because the law was forever for the Jews of Abraham Psalms 105:8-10.

9. The Old Covenant was given to Moses the lawgiver in Exodus.
Moses law was added because of transgressions till the seed should come Galatians 3:19.

10. Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses Matthew 5:17. The law of Moses was abolished at the cross once Christ fulfilled it in his Messianic earthly ministry to the Jews 2 Corinthians 3:13-16.

11. The New Covenant is Jesus Christ death, burial and resurrection 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 and not a continuation of Moses law.

12. The Old Covenant has to be understood as a will. A will has different things in it. If it is changed then the new will can have some of the same things with no change in context or same things with a different contexts or new things etc. but it will not be the same will as the Old will.

13. Jews can still live as a Jew culturally but not in the letter of the law.

14. The body of Christ is Jew and gentile and are one in the mystery of the church Ephesians 2:14-16; 3:6.

15. The law is one unit and was abolished because of the weaknesses and replaced by the better promises of the new covenant Hebrews 8:6.

16. I will stop here for now because of being lengthy and getting late. Jerry kelso
 
Upvote 0

jerry kelso

Food For Thought
Mar 13, 2013
4,846
238
✟119,343.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
khristosaneste,

1. There are different types of sessionism.
It concerns replacement theology of the church replacing Israel's earthly callings in the millennial reign.

2. 2 Samuel 7:4-16; 1 Chronicles 28:2-9 Kingdom forever conditioned on obedience.

3. Isaiah 2:2-4 Prophecy of Israel being at the head of the nations in the future kingdom reign where the law will go forth out of Zion.

4. Isaiah 9:6-7 The government shall be on his shoulders did not happen in Jesus ministry to the Jews under the KoH and the KoG message under the age of the law of Moses which the Gentiles were never under to begin with.

5. Romans 11:25-29 is about all Israel being saved to fulfill their gifts and callings which are eternal concerning the land and the Kingdom.

6. The church is a different age and we are being trained right now for the Kingdom 2 Timothy 2:12; if we suffer we shall reign.
Israel has to be purged because of being backslidden.

7. The new covenant replaced the old covenant Matthew 26:28; Hebrews 8:6-7.
Jeremiah 31:31-34; Hebrews 8:7-13 has not been made with the physical nation of Israel.
Many Jews are atheists and don't believe in Jesus as the Savior of the world.

8. Sessionism for Messianic Jews is more about the New Covenant being a continuation of the redemptive story and so the law was not abolished because the law was forever for the Jews of Abraham Psalms 105:8-10.

9. The Old Covenant was given to Moses the lawgiver in Exodus.
Moses law was added because of transgressions till the seed should come Galatians 3:19.

10. Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses Matthew 5:17. The law of Moses was abolished at the cross once Christ fulfilled it in his Messianic earthly ministry to the Jews 2 Corinthians 3:13-16.

11. The New Covenant is Jesus Christ death, burial and resurrection 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 and not a continuation of Moses law.

12. The Old Covenant has to be understood as a will. A will has different things in it. If it is changed then the new will can have some of the same things with no change in context or same things with a different contexts or new things etc. but it will not be the same will as the Old will.

13. Jews can still live as a Jew culturally but not in the letter of the law.

14. The body of Christ is Jew and gentile and are one in the mystery of the church Ephesians 2:14-16; 3:6.

15. The law is one unit and was abolished because of the weaknesses and replaced by the better promises of the new covenant Hebrews 8:6.

16. I will stop here for now because of being lengthy and getting late. Jerry kelso

khristonesaneste,

1. A recap of the Mosaic law being fulfilled and abolished; Matthew 5:17; Roman's 10:4; 2 Corinthians 3:12-16; Hebrews 8:6-7.
Psalms 105:8-10 shows the law was the promise of Abraham.
Galatians 3:19 shows the law of Moses was added because of transgressions till the seed should come who was Christ and was not ratified until he died and rose again because he was still in the age of the Mosaic law.

2. The KoH reign is about the throne and house of David being forever. 2 Samuel 7:7-14 and 1 Chronicles 28:2-9. It is eternal Isaiah 2:2-4; 9:6-7.
Jesus pronounced judgement for Israel's rejection Matthew 23:37-39; Matthew 24:1-2.
Israel is still backslidden and will come back to God Daniel 9:24-27; Hosea 6:1-3; Roman's 11:25-29.
Genesis 49:10; unto Shiloh comes the eternal kingdom of Isaiah 9:6-7 will not come to fruition.

3. The church is being trained now for the coming earthly kingdom 2 Timothy 2:12.
Israel has to be purged Daniel 9:24-27 and there part of the Davidic covenant to be head of the nations was conditioned by obedience not the church.
The theocracy of the KoH reign as head of the nations which connects with a civil government is with Christ and Israel for the law shall go forth from Zion Isaiah 2:2-4 and Christ will rule with a rod of iron Psalm 2:9.
Revelation 11:15 talks about the kingdoms of our world becoming Christ which will happen at Armageddon Revelation 16.
The church will come out Heaven as part of God's army to save Israel at Armageddon Revelation 19:11-15.

4. So the Mosaic law was abolished as a whole of the context in that theocracy and it was replaced by the new covenant in Christ blood for the whole world.
Believers are Jew and Gentiles who will be Kings, priest and rulers in the Kingdom to come Revelation 5:9-10.
The church is only spiritual Jews in a spiritual sense because of salvation. Romans 2 was talking to the unbelieving Jew who thought they were in the club because of being God's chosen people. The parallel of the ways that Jews were stuck up with pride about their chosen is found in Ezekiel 18 and many other passages.
This is why the church is not to get haughty with pride just because they have been grafted in to make Israel jealous. Read Roman's 11. Gotta go. Jerry kelso
 
Upvote 0

jerry kelso

Food For Thought
Mar 13, 2013
4,846
238
✟119,343.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
God said that what He commanded was for His people's own good (Deuteronomy 6:24, Deuteronomy 10:13), so if you believe that what God said is true, then how can you consider what is for our own good to be an unnecessary burden? According to 1 John 5:3, the commands of God are not burdensome. According to 1 Peter 1:13-16, as part of the New Covenant we are told to have a holy conduct for God is holy, which is a reference to Leviticus where God was giving instructions for how to have a holy conduct, which included keeping kosher (Leviticus 11:44-45). So keeping kosher is not an unnecessary burden, but rather living according to the holiness of our God is something that we should delight in doing by faith because we trust Him about how we should live, as Paul did (Romans 3:31, Romans 7:22) and in accordance with the example that Messiah set for his followers to follow.



As I explained in that post, the issue in Galatians was that a group of Jews were teaching that Gentiles needed to become Jewish proselytes involving the process of circumcision and to live as Jews according to their oral laws, rulings, traditions, and fences in order to become saved. So there a distinction between God requiring circumcision as a sign of the covenant and man requiring circumcision in order to become circumcised in order to become saved, and we must be careful not to mistake something that was only against obey the laws of men and being against obeying the Law of God. If I were saying that we need to become circumcised and keep kosher in order to become saved, then I would be undermining faith in the righteousness of Christ because the one and only way to become saved is through faith in him, but God never command those things for that purpose, so trying to become saved by obeying God's commands has always been a legalistic perversion of them.



Ezekiel talks about animal offerings being made in the temple, so I do not see how you can avoid literal interpretation.


soyeong,

1. Deuteronomy 6:24; And the Lord commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that might preserve us alive, as it is at this day.
This was said under the age of the Mosaic law. They were to do those things that they may be preserved in that age.
Verse 25 is the righteousness of the law that is shown in Roman's 10:5 which is the man that doeth them shall live in them. The New Covenant is the righteousness of faith which is according to the finished work of Christ.

2. Deuteronomy 10:13; To keep the commandments of the Lord and his statutes which I command thee this day for thy good?
This was said under the Mosaic law age which was till the seed should come Galatians 3:19 and Matthew 5:17 says he came to fulfill and when it was satisfied, it expired and then was abolished 2 Corinthians 3:13-16.

3. 1John 5:3; For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.
These are commandants of the context of the New Covenant not the Old Covenant which were a yoke of bondage according to Peter which neither our fathers or we were able to bear Acts 15:10.
Roman's 7 shows the weakness of Moses law against the law of sin and death which took advantage of the law that was holy and good and made them live to sin.
Romans 8:2 The law of sin and death was taken away by the law of the Spirit.
It shows the weakness of the law that was replaced by the New Covenant better promises Hebrews 8:6.

4. 1 Peter 1:13-16; Holiness is the character of God and was applied to all ages. You don't think Enoch or Noah wasn't Holy? Genesis 5:24; Genesis 6:9. They were before the law and not under a written law.
Leviticus 11:44-45 was under the Old Covenant which has been abolished and replaced 2 Corinthians 3:13-16; Hebrews 8:6-7.
Moral laws were in each age but under a different context in each covenant so it doesn't mean it is the same covenant or a continuation. For example, There was no written law when Cain killed Abel but his conscience knew it was wrong.
The law had those committing adultery with mandatory of stoning and the New Covenant does not.
The New Covenant is based on better promises, not the weakness of the law Hebrews 8:6-7.
The law could not save one and could not help one to perform the commandment because only the person of Jesus could do these things.

5. Roman's 3:31; Do we make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
Verse 27; Where is boasting then? It is excluded, by what law of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
We are under the New Covenant of the law of faith not works of the mandatory Old covenant commandment with a specific Blessing and Cursing system.
Paul said that we are blessed and set in heavenly places with spiritual blessings Ephesians 1:3.

6. Roman's 7:22: Their were plenty of people who delighted in the Mosaic law. We are to delight in the New Covenant as well.
Roman's 7 was about Paul under the Old Covenant and how the law of sin and death took advantage of the Old Covenant law and made them live to sin.
Paul delighted in the law of Moses and he even knew that a Covenant believer could come under the spirit of Moses law and live to sin and he didn't wean the that to a New Covenant believer's example for their daily lives.
Paul saw another law in his members, warring against the law of his mind that brought him into the captivity of the law of sin and death verse 23. Verse 24; O wretched man, that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? Verse 25; I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
This last verse is really a misplaced conclusion to a certain point though it doesn't alter the truth.
The first part automatically answers to the previous question, who shall deliver me from this body of death? If put at the end it would end on a crescendo and leads into Roman's 8:1 better which says Now there is therefore now no condemnation in Christ Jesus.
The second part should've been first to be conducive to the context of the subject.
The flesh wars against the Spirit and James says in James 4:1-3 that lust in your members that is consumed will conceives sin.
But the context is about the law of sin and death taking advantage of the law that was holy and good and made them live to the frailty of man in sin more than overcoming and abstaining from all appearances of evil and this know that the law of sin and death was done away with by the law of the Spirit Roman's 8:2.
Since it is a fact that with the mind we serve God and with the flesh sin, which Roman's 8:1-15 talks about; it is to be a reminder not to fall into the same state as the Old Covenant believers did because of Roman's 8:2 has happened and we are under the better promises of the New Covenant Hebrews 8:6-7.

7. The Judaizers were always trying to proselyted Gentiles which Peter gave revelation in Acts 10 with Cornelius and his family Acts 15 at the council and Paul in Acts 21 and was part of the reason Paul went to the gentiles in Acts 28.

8. The Mosaic law was only given to the Jews till the seed should come Galatians 3:19.
The New Covenant law was forever and was the Abrahamic Covenant covered salvation by grace and not works and covered the gifts and callings of Israel about the land for Israel and Kingdom reign on earth as the head of the ruling government with Christ at the helm Genesis 12-15; Roman's 4; Genesis 49:10; Isaiah 2:2-4 and Isaiah 9:6-7 and Isaiah 60,62 and all the minor prophets prophecy's about the Kingdom on the Day of the Lord and Jesus earthly ministry which was about the KoH reign that the Jews rejected but will be purged Daniel 9:24-27 and gathered to become one stick and never be separated no more Ezekiel 37:15:28. So the Spiritual Jew theory that the church alone is spiritual Israel and that Israel doesn't have a covenant to be fulfilled to fulfill their gifts and callings is wrong and debunked and is a lie.

9. Israel the nation or the church of Jews and Gentiles are not under the Old Covenant of the Mosaic law but under the New Covenant of law which is a different covenant, contract and context than the Old Covenant.
This has nothing to do with Jews becoming Gentile Christians or vice verse.
Christian Jews can live like a Jew culturally but cannot look to the former types and shadows and commandments in the way of mandatory to undermine the righteousness of New Covenant of faith as I believe you put it. Under the spirit of the law it would become legalistic when it causes the consciousness of sin. Roman's 7.

10. Torah has to be understood in proper perspective of the NC for we are in the church age.

11. This doesn't mean Jews cannot perform commandments in the Old covenant or even Gentile Christians.
Dietary laws are not mandatory for Gentile believers but what harm would it be to refrain from pork? Trust me it would be very beneficial for many healthwise.
All the moral laws are in place and they were contained in the Mosaic law but a under a different ethic.
The Mosaic law of spiritual principles is what brings it in close relation to the NC and why it makes some Jews and gentiles think we are still under the Mosaic law.
At the same time, because of different mechanics of ethics the Mosaic law and the NC are at opposite polars and to be mixed in the overall context causes the struggle of the flesh and the conscience of sin. We are to have the mind of Christ and imitate him etc. not be tangled up in the struggle of the flesh. We are more than overcomers through the better promises of the NC Roman's 8:37; Hebrews 8:6-7. But we have to be persuaded like Paul Roman's 8:38-39.Jerry Kelso
 
Upvote 0

Meowzltov

Freylekher Yid
Aug 3, 2014
18,606
4,466
64
Southern California
✟67,237.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Others
I'll be honest I didn't even know this word until I went down the Wikipedia rabbit hole.

Supersessionism is the idea that before Christ came Judaism was the true faith but when Christ was born, lived, performed miracles, was crucified for our sins and resurrected he completed Judaism since Christ is the Messiah that the Jewish people had been awaiting and now Christianity is the truth faith.


I thought that this was just common sense, but apparently it's controversial in some circles because it denies the current validity of the Jewish faith. I don't get that, since of course if Christ is the truth then ipso facto non-Christian religions are not.


I'm Eastern Orthodox by the way.


What's your opinion on this?
I'm a Hebrew Catholic, aka a Catholic who is also a Jew who continues to keep Jewish traditions.

  • Supersessionism is a blight upon Christian history because it is the arrogant doctrine that underlies Christian anti-semitism.
  • Supersessionism requires the "spiritualization" of hundreds of passages of scriptures.
  • There are scriptures that state that unbelieving Jews are among the elect and ALL Israel shall be saved.
  • It can't explain the continued existence of the Jewish people despite all the obstacles and 2000 years of diaspora.
  • It can't explain the miraculous restoration of Jews to the Promised Land in 1948.


Six reasons why Supersessionism is not Biblical:
  1. The Bible explicitly promises that God’s covenant with the Jews would be eternal (ie. unbreakable).
  2. The New Testament explicitly states that the Old Testament promises and covenants to Israel are STILL the possession of Israel, even during this Church age and even while the nation is currently in a state of unbelief.
  3. The Old Testament explicitly teaches the future, permanent restoration of the nation Israel.
  4. The New Testament reaffirms the Old Testament expectation of a future salvation and restoration of Israel.
  5. Nowhere in the entire New Testament is the term ‘Israel’ used for those who are not ethnic Jews. Thus, there is no biblical basis for identifying the Church as the ‘new Israel.’
  6. If God could break His covenant with the Jews, then we cannot trust Him to keep His promises to us Christians!

http://mysouthland.com/Resources/Theology/6 reasons Replacement Theology is false - the Church has not replaced the nation of Israel.pdf
 
Upvote 0

Soyeong

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2015
12,661
4,681
Hudson
✟347,695.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
soyeong,

1. Deuteronomy 6:24; And the Lord commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that might preserve us alive, as it is at this day.
This was said under the age of the Mosaic law. They were to do those things that they may be preserved in that age.
Verse 25 is the righteousness of the law that is shown in Roman's 10:5 which is the man that doeth them shall live in them. The New Covenant is the righteousness of faith which is according to the finished work of Christ.

God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, so I see no particular reasons why God's commands are not for our own good in this age as well. Faith has always been an important attribute and the one and only way to become righteous has only ever been by faith, for the righteous shall live by faith (Habakkuk 2:4). In Deuteronomy 6:20-25, obeying the Law was about having faith in God to defeat Pharaoh, faith in God to bring them up out of Egypt, faith in God to bring them to the land that He promised their fathers, faith in God that His commands were for their own good, and faith in God to preserve them, so it was by faith that righteousness was theirs and by the same faith that they were careful to do all that God commanded them. As Jesus said in Matthew 23:23, faith is one of the weightier matters of the Law, so obedience to God's Law has always been about trusting Him about how we should live, and in Romans 10:5-10, it is the way to submit to Jesus as Lord.

2. Deuteronomy 10:13; To keep the commandments of the Lord and his statutes which I command thee this day for thy good?
This was said under the Mosaic law age which was till the seed should come Galatians 3:19 and Matthew 5:17 says he came to fulfill and when it was satisfied, it expired and then was abolished 2 Corinthians 3:13-16.

One thing that everyone mentioned in Hebrews 11 had in common is that they all heard the voice of God and obeyed His commands by faith. This is the relationship that God wanted with Israel, but when when they heard God's voice they got cold feet and wanted to have Moses as a mediator instead (Exodus 20:19, Deuteronomy 5:22-27). Just as a marriage where the husband and wife only interacted with each other through a mediator is less than ideal, so was the the covenant that God agreed to, which is why a New Covenant was necessary. In Genesis 26:5, Abraham knew what God's commands, statutes, and laws were because he listened to God and God told him, but in working through a mediator, Moses needed to record God's laws, which was needed until Christ when he have his teachings and his example to follow for how to obey God's Law and when we have the indwelling of the Spirit to lead us in obedience to God's Law (Ezekiel 36:26-27).

Jesus fulfilled the Law in the same sense that Romans 15:18-19 says that Paul fulfilled the Gospel, namely that he fully taught obedience to it in word and in deed, not that he did away with it. The Law was given to reveal was sin is (Romans 3:20), without the Law we wouldn't even know what sin is (Romans 7:7), sin is defined as Lawlessness (1 John 3:4), and Jesus came with the message to repent from our sins for the Kingdom of God is at hand, so repenting from our disobedience to the Mosaic Law is a central part of the Gospel message. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus said he came to fulfill the law in contrast with abolishing it, yet you have interpreted it to mean the same thing. Rather, fulfilling the Law is a rabbinic term that was used to refer to interpreting it in a way that filled it up with meaning or to demonstrate a full understanding of the Law by word or by example, while abolishing the Law referred to interpreting it in a way that subtracted from its meaning or undermined it. Jesus was about to speak against what the teachers of the Law were teaching, which would have sounded to them like he was undermining the Law, so he preceded that by assuring them that he came not to undermine it, but to correctly teach how to obey it, and then proceeded to fulfill the Law six times throughout the rest of the chapter.

If you believe that Jesus was sinless, that he practiced what he preached, and preached what he practiced, then you should believe that he commanded obedience to the Law both by word and by example. In John 14:15, we are told that if we love him, then we will obey his commands, so obeying God's Law has always been about demonstrating our love for God and our faith in Him about how we should live, and thereby growing in a relationship with Messiah based on love and faith. In Romans 10:4, it is saying that a relationship with Messiah is the goal of the Law for righteousness for everyone who believes. Prior to Paul's Damascus road experience, he had been keeping the Law without having a focus on his relationship with Messiah, so he had been missing the whole point and counted it all as rubbish (Philippians 3:8). So in 2 Corinthians 3:13-16, the veil over their eyes was that they were reading the Old Covenant and missing that the whole purpose was about teachings us about Messiah and how to have a relationship with him.

3. 1John 5:3; For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.
These are commandants of the context of the New Covenant not the Old Covenant which were a yoke of bondage according to Peter which neither our fathers or we were able to bear Acts 15:10.

In Deuteronomy 30:11-14 and Romans 10:5-10, God said that what He commanded was not too difficult and 1 John 5:3 confirms that the commands of God are not burdensome, so if Acts 15:10 we referring to the Mosaic Law, then they would be directly contradicting God, which I think is a pretty good indication that they were not speaking about the Mosaic Law. Another good indication is that the requirement being discussed in Acts 15:1 is not found anywhere in the Mosaic Law.

According to Isaiah 45:25, all Israel will be saved, so many Jews incorrectly thought that Gentiles had to become Jewish proselytes in order to become saved, which meant becoming circumcised and becoming part of the group of the people who agreed at Sinai to do everything that Moses said. By the 1st century, those who had the power passed down to them to make authoritative interpretations and rulings of the Law were referred to as sitting in Moses' seat and this had become a large body of oral laws, traditions, and fences (Matthew 23:2-4). So by agreeing to become circumcised, Gentiles were becoming Jews and agreeing to live as Jews according to all the oral laws of the Pharisees all for the purpose of becoming saved, and by rejecting this man-made requirement the Jerusalem Council was upholding God's Law.

In Matthew 15:2-3, Jesus was asked why his disciples broke the traditions of the elders and he responded by asking them why they broke the command of God for the sake of their tradition. Furthermore, he said that for the sake of their tradition they made void the Word of God (Matthew 15:6), he quoted Isaiah to say that they worshipped God in vain because they were teaching as doctrines the commands of men (Matthew 15:8-9), and he called them hypocrites for setting aside the commands of God to establish their own traditions (Mark 7:6-9). According to Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from God's Law, so the Pharisees needed to repent of their sin of adding their own laws, the Jerusalem Council would have needed to repent of their sin if they had told Gentiles not to follow any of God's laws. So in Matthew 23:2-4, Jesus was not criticizing the Pharisees for teaching the people to obey what God had commanded them, but rather he was criticizing them for putting the heavy burden of their many oral laws and traditions on the people. This means that in Acts 15:10, they were simply expressing the same opinion of Pharisaic oral laws as Jesus had expressed.

Roman's 7 shows the weakness of Moses law against the law of sin and death which took advantage of the law that was holy and good and made them live to sin.
Romans 8:2 The law of sin and death was taken away by the law of the Spirit.
It shows the weakness of the law that was replaced by the New Covenant better promises Hebrews 8:6.

God has always been holy, righteous, and good, so the way to act according to God's character has existed from the beginning independently of any covenant, through it was later revealed through the Mosaic Law. So there is a difference between a set of instructions for how to act according to God's character and a covenant agreement to abide by those instructions. Anyone who wants to find out how to do what is holy, righteous, and good can do so by reading the Mosaic Law regardless of what covenant they are under, but as part of the New Covenant, we are still told to follow God's instructions for how to do what is holy, righteous, and good (1 Peter 1:13-16, 1 John 3:4-10, Ephesians 2:10).

In Hebrews 8, it says that the New Covenant was based on better promises with a superior mediator, but it does not say that it is based on superior laws because that would require following a different God with superior holiness, righteousness, and goodness. If doing a particular action was in accordance with God's righteousness before Messiah came, but after he came that is no longer the case, then God's righteousness has changed, but God's righteousness is eternal and does not change, so neither does the way to act according to it.

In Hebrews 8, God did not find fault with His law, but rather he found fault with the people for breaking His covenant because of the hardness of their hearts. God plan was not lower His righteous standard so that anyone could meet it by agreeing to a few factual statements, but rather God's plan take away our hearts of stone, give us hearts of flesh, send His Spirit to lead us in obedience to His law (Ezekiel 36:26-27), make a New Covenant where He would put his Law in our minds and write it on our hearts so that we will obey it (Jeremiah 31:33), and send His Son to redeem us from all Lawlessness (Titus 2:14) so that we would be free to obey His Law and meet its righteous requirement (Romans 8:3-4). It is those who have a carnal mind who refuse to submit to God's Law (Romans 8:7).

4. 1 Peter 1:13-16; Holiness is the character of God and was applied to all ages. You don't think Enoch or Noah wasn't Holy? Genesis 5:24; Genesis 6:9. They were before the law and not under a written law.
Leviticus 11:44-45 was under the Old Covenant which has been abolished and replaced 2 Corinthians 3:13-16; Hebrews 8:6-7.
Moral laws were in each age but under a different context in each covenant so it doesn't mean it is the same covenant or a continuation. For example, There was no written law when Cain killed Abel but his conscience knew it was wrong.
The law had those committing adultery with mandatory of stoning and the New Covenant does not.
The New Covenant is based on better promises, not the weakness of the law Hebrews 8:6-7.
The law could not save one and could not help one to perform the commandment because only the person of Jesus could do these things.

In Leviticus 11:44-45, it is instructing how to be holy for God is holy, so the only way for that to be abolished is for God's holiness to first be abolished. Morality is in regard to what we ought to do and we ought to obey God, so all of God's laws are inherently moral laws and it is sinful and immoral to disobey any of them.

There are many instances in Genesis where we can see that God's laws were already in place and being followed before the Law was given at Sinai. For example, with Cain and Abel, it is implied that God had given them instructions for how to make offerings, and Cain knew that he had done something wrong when he killed Abel. With Noah, he had been given instructions for what to do with clean and unclean animals, but without being told how to differentiate between the two, so the implication is that he had been given prior instructions. Likewise, he was described as being righteous and blameless in his generation (Genesis 6:9) and I don't think that was on accident, but rather because God had instructed him on what to do and he obeyed by faith.

John 8:1-12 is an example of Jesus following the law rather than making changes to how it is obeyed. There was no judge to pronounce a sentence (Deuteronomy 19:17-21), there was no man accused (Leviticus 20:10), he didn't have any witnesses to examine (Numbers 35:30, Deuteronomy 17:6, Deuteronomy 19:5), and he did not have a confession, so if he had condemned her, then he would have acted in violation of the law. Just a few verses later Jesus said that he judged no one (John 8:15) and he also said that he came not to judge (John 12:47), so he did not exercise authority as a magistrate and did not condemn her, but he did recognize her action as sin, and told her to go and sin no more. The people in this passage were trying to trick Jesus into making a judgement, which he avoided doing, so he was not taking a stance against obeying his law.

I completely agree that the Law could save no one, but it was never given for that purpose. Rather, it was given as instructions for what to do by faith because we have been saved.

5. Roman's 3:31; Do we make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
Verse 27; Where is boasting then? It is excluded, by what law of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
We are under the New Covenant of the law of faith not works of the mandatory Old covenant commandment with a specific Blessing and Cursing system.
Paul said that we are blessed and set in heavenly places with spiritual blessings Ephesians 1:3.

Paul spent a lot of time hammering home the point that obeying the Law was not about trying to become justified and that we are justified by faith apart from the Law, yet many people today are still making the error of thinking that obeying the Law was about trying to become justified, only they have compounded their error by concluding therefore our faith does away with our need to obey the Law, whereas Paul concluded that our faith does not abolish the Law, but rather our faith upholds the Law (Romans 3:27-31). The Israelites who believed God when He said that His commands were for their own good demonstrated their faith in Him about how they should live by living in obedience to them, and that is the way that our faith is to uphold the Law. We have received grace to bring about the obedience that faith requires (Romans 1:5), so our faith is no different.

6. Roman's 7:22: Their were plenty of people who delighted in the Mosaic law. We are to delight in the New Covenant as well.
Roman's 7 was about Paul under the Old Covenant and how the law of sin and death took advantage of the Old Covenant law and made them live to sin.
Paul delighted in the law of Moses and he even knew that a Covenant believer could come under the spirit of Moses law and live to sin and he didn't wean the that to a New Covenant believer's example for their daily lives.
Paul saw another law in his members, warring against the law of his mind that brought him into the captivity of the law of sin and death verse 23. Verse 24; O wretched man, that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? Verse 25; I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
This last verse is really a misplaced conclusion to a certain point though it doesn't alter the truth.
The first part automatically answers to the previous question, who shall deliver me from this body of death? If put at the end it would end on a crescendo and leads into Roman's 8:1 better which says Now there is therefore now no condemnation in Christ Jesus.
The second part should've been first to be conducive to the context of the subject.
The flesh wars against the Spirit and James says in James 4:1-3 that lust in your members that is consumed will conceives sin.
But the context is about the law of sin and death taking advantage of the law that was holy and good and made them live to the frailty of man in sin more than overcoming and abstaining from all appearances of evil and this know that the law of sin and death was done away with by the law of the Spirit Roman's 8:2.
Since it is a fact that with the mind we serve God and with the flesh sin, which Roman's 8:1-15 talks about; it is to be a reminder not to fall into the same state as the Old Covenant believers did because of Roman's 8:2 has happened and we are under the better promises of the New Covenant Hebrews 8:6-7.

The problem was not with God's law, but with the law of sin and death, so Christ gave himself to free us from the law of sin and death so that we can be free to do what is good and holy in obedience to God and in accordance with Messiah's example. Jesus did not give himself to redeem us from all Lawlessness so that we could go back to the Lawlessness that we were redeemed from, but so that we would be free to become obedient servants of God (Romans 6:16-19).

7. The Judaizers were always trying to proselyted Gentiles which Peter gave revelation in Acts 10 with Cornelius and his family Acts 15 at the council and Paul in Acts 21 and was part of the reason Paul went to the gentiles in Acts 28.

There is a theme throughout the Bible that we must obey God rather than man, so we need to be careful not to take something that was only against obeying man's laws as being against obeying the Law of the God that we serve.

8. The Mosaic law was only given to the Jews till the seed should come Galatians 3:19.
The New Covenant law was forever and was the Abrahamic Covenant covered salvation by grace and not works and covered the gifts and callings of Israel about the land for Israel and Kingdom reign on earth as the head of the ruling government with Christ at the helm Genesis 12-15; Roman's 4; Genesis 49:10; Isaiah 2:2-4 and Isaiah 9:6-7 and Isaiah 60,62 and all the minor prophets prophecy's about the Kingdom on the Day of the Lord and Jesus earthly ministry which was about the KoH reign that the Jews rejected but will be purged Daniel 9:24-27 and gathered to become one stick and never be separated no more Ezekiel 37:15:28. So the Spiritual Jew theory that the church alone is spiritual Israel and that Israel doesn't have a covenant to be fulfilled to fulfill their gifts and callings is wrong and debunked and is a lie.

While it is true that the Mosaic Law was only given to the Jews, it is not true that it was meant only for the Jews. As you noted with Isaiah 2:2-4 and with Isaiah 49:6, Israel was intended to be a light to the nations to teach them how to serve God. According to Jeremiah 31:31, the New Covenant was only made with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, so if you are not part of Israel, then you are not part of the New Covenant. However, according to Romans 9:6-8, Israel is made up of those who have faith in the promise and according to Ephesians 2:19, through faith in Messiah we are new fellow citizens of Israel, so we should follow the instructions that God gave to Israel. Every single prophet up to including Jesus came with the message to repent from our sins and to turn back to obedience to God's commands, and according to 1 Corinthians 10:1-13, we are to learn from Israel's example of disobedience, not copy it. Do you think that God is unjust and that we won't be held to account for doing the same things that the Israelites were held to account for?

9. Israel the nation or the church of Jews and Gentiles are not under the Old Covenant of the Mosaic law but under the New Covenant of law which is a different covenant, contract and context than the Old Covenant.
This has nothing to do with Jews becoming Gentile Christians or vice verse.
Christian Jews can live like a Jew culturally but cannot look to the former types and shadows and commandments in the way of mandatory to undermine the righteousness of New Covenant of faith as I believe you put it. Under the spirit of the law it would become legalistic when it causes the consciousness of sin. Roman's 7.

I agree that we are not under the Old Covenant, but we are still under the same God, whose holiness, righteousness, and goodness don't change, so neither does the way to act according to God's character. God's character is not dependant on any covenant and does not change from covenant to covenant. Obeying the Mosaic Law is not about acting like Jews, but about acting according to the holiness, righteousness, and goodness of our God. If we do not do what God has revealed to be righteous and to go back to doing what He has revealed to be sin, then we would be undermining the righteousness of the New Covenant. According to Titus 2:11-14, our salvation involves being trained by grace to do what God has revealed to be godly, righteous, and good and to renounce doing what He has revealed to be ungodly and sinful, which is essentially what the Mosaic Law was given to instruct us how to do.

10. Torah has to be understood in proper perspective of the NC for we are in the church age.

The word Greek word "ekklesia" means "assembly" or "church" was used in the Septuagint to refer to the assembly of Israel in the wildness, so that is when the Church Age began. The NT writers quoted or alluded to the OT thousands of times to show that it supported what they said and to show that they didn't deviate from it. In Acts 17:11, the Bereans were praised because they checked everything against OT Scriptures to see if what Paul said was true, so if your interpretation of Paul can't be supported by the OT, then you have understood him differently than the people who walked and talked with him. The OT is how we know we need a Messiah, how we know that there will be a Messiah, how we will know how to recognize him, how to have a relationship with him, and how we know that what the NT says about him is true, so the OT is foundational to the NT.

11. This doesn't mean Jews cannot perform commandments in the Old covenant or even Gentile Christians.
Dietary laws are not mandatory for Gentile believers but what harm would it be to refrain from pork? Trust me it would be very beneficial for many healthwise.
All the moral laws are in place and they were contained in the Mosaic law but a under a different ethic.
The Mosaic law of spiritual principles is what brings it in close relation to the NC and why it makes some Jews and gentiles think we are still under the Mosaic law.
At the same time, because of different mechanics of ethics the Mosaic law and the NC are at opposite polars and to be mixed in the overall context causes the struggle of the flesh and the conscience of sin. We are to have the mind of Christ and imitate him etc. not be tangled up in the struggle of the flesh. We are more than overcomers through the better promises of the NC Roman's 8:37; Hebrews 8:6-7. But we have to be persuaded like Paul Roman's 8:38-39.Jerry Kelso

If you agree Christ lived in perfect obedience to the Law, that we should imitate him, follow his example, and walk in the same way that he walked, then it shouldn't be a mystery how to do that. Jesus set an example of refraining from eating pork, so straightforwardly his followers should follow his example. God gave the Law to make us conscious of sin so that we would stop doing it, not so that we would continue doing it. If we are to be overcomers, then we need to stop doing the things that God revealed to be sin, not disregard those instructions and Messiah's example of obedience to those instructions. Now that we know what God has revealed to be holy, righteous, and good and what things He revealed to be sinful, ignorance is no longer an excuse.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0