Jacob’s Trouble and the Great Tribulation

[Copperhead]

The New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled word-for-word by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and specifically applied to the Christ's Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8 cannot be reconciled with the Two Peoples of God doctrine of modern Dispensational Theology.



.

That is true, if one does not understand what the Church is and how it is different from Israel. Israel is the wife of God, that is stated throughout the OT. The church is alluded to as the bride of the Messiah and the Body of Messiah.

And also a confusion of covenants. The writer of Hebrews and Paul to the Corinthians is alluding to the Mosaic covenant. That is not the Abrahamic covenant which is and will be in effect even unto the reign of the Messiah on earth. God made that specifically clear in several passages, that it is an everlasting covenant. He even sealed the deal by confirming it Himself, alone, when He went between the animal sacrifice carcasses that had been divided, after He put Abraham into a deep sleep. As long as the sun comes up, as long as the moon is out at night, as long as the waves roar on the shore, Israel will be a nation before Him. That is the Abrahamic covenant.

The land and all the earthly promises were made thru the Abrahamic covenant. The Mosaic covenant was the covenant with the nation and giving of the Law. It established a national Israel. It was a national covenant. The Abrahamic covenant is with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Israel) and established before the nation existed.

The church is also a holy nation, as Peter stated. Not under the Abrahamic covenant, or the Mosaic covenant, but the New Covenant of the Messiah.

One thing that trips most folks up is that Hebrews is just that... a letter that is loaded with apologetic regarding the Messiah addressed to Hebrews that have not come to faith in Messiah. The writer makes that assertion early on, in Hebrews 3:1 where he asks these Hebrews to consider the Apostle and High Priest of his confession, Yeshua Ha Mashiach. It would be a non sequitur to ask those that already believe Yeshua to consider Him as if they were being presented Yeshua for the first time.

The writer goes to enormous lengths in the letter to compare how Yeshua is better than the temple, angels, the Torah, the Prophets, etc. How the faith of Abraham is what is required. And how Yeshua is the goal of the instruction (Torah) of the Mosaic covenant. Now it seems rather stupid to have to explain that to people who have already believed, even if they had backslidden. But to Hebrews who maybe knew of Yeshua but had never placed their hope and trust in Him, it would make sense to outline how Yeshua is better than these things of the Mosaic covenant.

And Hebrews 6 lays down the gauntlet. That those who turn aside from the correct path and reject the Messiah, to change their mind and be renewed unto salvation. The writer is stating the fact: The goal of the Torah is the Messiah. It is time to get off the fence and accept Him, for there is no other way to be reconciled to God.

The writer also calls them Holy Brethren. And that would be true of a Hebrew writer addressing other Hebrews and still not mean believers. Israel, collectively is a Holy people, which is the definition of Holy... set apart. That does not mean all Hebrews are saved because of that. It is a corporate setting apart, not an individual one like a believer in Yeshua.

What is sad is how the church lost its Hebrew roots and understanding that requires discussions like this. But when one cuts off the anchor, the ship is bound to drift off.

Romans 11:18 (NKJV Strong's,) do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.

 

[BABerean2]

As long as the sun comes up, as long as the moon is out at night, as long as the waves roar on the shore, Israel will be a nation before Him. That is the Abrahamic covenant.

You have replaced the One Seed, with the many seeds in the verse below.

Gal 3:16　 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.　

.

 

[jgr]

You have replaced the One Seed, with the many seeds in the verse below.

Gal 3:16　 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.　

.

deleted

 

[jgr]

That is true, if one does not understand what the Church is and how it is different from Israel. Israel is the wife of God, that is stated throughout the OT. The church is alluded to as the bride of the Messiah and the Body of Messiah.

And also a confusion of covenants. The writer of Hebrews and Paul to the Corinthians is alluding to the Mosaic covenant. That is not the Abrahamic covenant which is and will be in effect even unto the reign of the Messiah on earth. God made that specifically clear in several passages, that it is an everlasting covenant. He even sealed the deal by confirming it Himself, alone, when He went between the animal sacrifice carcasses that had been divided, after He put Abraham into a deep sleep. As long as the sun comes up, as long as the moon is out at night, as long as the waves roar on the shore, Israel will be a nation before Him. That is the Abrahamic covenant.

The land and all the earthly promises were made thru the Abrahamic covenant. The Mosaic covenant was the covenant with the nation and giving of the Law. It established a national Israel. It was a national covenant. The Abrahamic covenant is with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Israel) and established before the nation existed.

The church is also a holy nation, as Peter stated. Not under the Abrahamic covenant, or the Mosaic covenant, but the New Covenant of the Messiah.

One thing that trips most folks up is that Hebrews is just that... a letter that is loaded with apologetic regarding the Messiah addressed to Hebrews that have not come to faith in Messiah. The writer makes that assertion early on, in Hebrews 3:1 where he asks these Hebrews to consider the Apostle and High Priest of his confession, Yeshua Ha Mashiach. It would be a non sequitur to ask those that already believe Yeshua to consider Him as if they were being presented Yeshua for the first time.

The writer goes to enormous lengths in the letter to compare how Yeshua is better than the temple, angels, the Torah, the Prophets, etc. How the faith of Abraham is what is required. And how Yeshua is the goal of the instruction (Torah) of the Mosaic covenant. Now it seems rather stupid to have to explain that to people who have already believed, even if they had backslidden. But to Hebrews who maybe knew of Yeshua but had never placed their hope and trust in Him, it would make sense to outline how Yeshua is better than these things of the Mosaic covenant.

And Hebrews 6 lays down the gauntlet. That those who turn aside from the correct path and reject the Messiah, to change their mind and be renewed unto salvation. The writer is stating the fact: The goal of the Torah is the Messiah. It is time to get off the fence and accept Him, for there is no other way to be reconciled to God.

The writer also calls them Holy Brethren. And that would be true of a Hebrew writer addressing other Hebrews and still not mean believers. Israel, collectively is a Holy people, which is the definition of Holy... set apart. That does not mean all Hebrews are saved because of that. It is a corporate setting apart, not an individual one like a believer in Yeshua.

What is sad is how the church lost its Hebrew roots and understanding that requires discussions like this. But when one cuts off the anchor, the ship is bound to drift off.

Romans 11:18 (NKJV Strong's,) do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.

In God's New Will and Testament, all promises are fulfilled in Christ.

There is no "confusion of covenants." My Bible is divided into two covenants/testaments, the Old and the New. So is your Bible. The Mosaic, Abrahamic, et al covenants are the OT promises.

The OT promises are the promissory clauses of God's Old Will and Testament, and they are both revoked and fulfilled in the promissory clauses of His New Will and Testament, written in the Blood of His Son Jesus Christ, the Divine Testator.

If you have made your own Will and Testament, you will see that the very first clause states the following, or its equivalent:

"I HEREBY REVOKE all former Wills and other testamentary dispositions by me at any time therefore made and declare this to be my Last Will and Testament."

This means that all former wills and testaments, and all of their promissory clauses, are completely null and void. In their place, the promissory clauses of the current last new will and testament are the only ones in force and effect. Any promissory clause which appeared in the old will and testament, but does not appear in the new will and testament, is irrevocably null and void unless another new will and testament is made which re-includes it.

We see the new promissory clauses of God's New Will and Testament in:

Matthew 21:33-45
In this parable, the son, who is identified as the heir, typifies Christ.

Galatians 3:16
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

2 Corinthians 1:20
For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us.

Hebrews 1:1,2
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

and other scriptures. In them, we see that the Heir and Beneficiary is Christ alone, that all of the promises are affirmed and confirmed in Him, and that He is Heir of all things. All includes the OT land promises, the restoration promises, the blessings promises, and all else.

There are no exceptions to "all".

Additional promissory clauses in:

Romans 8:16-17
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Galatians 3:29
And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

make us who are in Christ joint heirs with Him.


But there are no promissory clauses for anyone who is not in Christ.

 

[Copperhead]

The names of the two sections of the Bible are the Tanakh and Brit Hadashah (New Covenant). Later people, from a position of bias, gave them the name of Old Testament and New Testament.

While it is a New Covenant, that does not mean it replaces previous covenants. Calling the Tanakh "old testament" implies that it has all been abrogated and can be ignored.

Now, what was the Noahic Covenant? What was the Abrahamic Covenant? And what was the Mosaic Covenant? All 3 of these are separate covenants made by God, with the all three still in effect and not abrogated by the New Covenant, and are all three mentioned in the Tanakh. And all three of these covenants I referred to are made in perpetuity. They last until there is a new heaven and new earth.

The Noahic covenant, that God would never destroy the entire earth by water again. That is still in effect and has not been abrogated by the New Covenant. If it does, then God is a liar. It might not seem so to people in Texas recently, but it is still in effect.

Genesis 8:21 (NKJV Strong's,) And the Lord smelled a soothing aroma. Then the Lord said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man's sake, although the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.

Likewise, the Abrahamic Covenant is still in effect and will be so as long as the sun rises and sets, the moon gives off its reflected light, and the waves are roaring on the sea shore. The New Covenant does not abrogate that one either, or again, God is a liar.

Jeremiah 31:35-36 (NKJV Strong's,) Thus says the Lord,
Who gives the sun for a light by day,
The ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night,
Who disturbs the sea,
And its waves roar
(The Lord of hosts is His name):
36 “If those ordinances depart
From before Me, says the Lord,
Then the seed of Israel shall also cease
From being a nation before Me forever.”

The Mosaic Covenant (Torah or "Law"). Those that choose to live under the Mosaic Covenant will be judged by the Mosaic Covenant. Romans 2:12. And as Yeshua Himself said:

Matthew 5:18 (Complete Jewish Bible) Yes indeed! I tell you that until heaven and earth pass away, not so much as a yud or a stroke will pass from the Torah — not until everything that must happen has happened

And the only way to get out of that one is to flee to the Messiah, which is basis of the New Covenant, and be free of the penalty of the Torah (Law)

 

[jgr]

The names of the two sections of the Bible are the Tanakh and Brit Hadashah (New Covenant). Later people, from a position of bias, gave them the name of Old Testament and New Testament.

While it is a New Covenant, that does not mean it replaces previous covenants. Calling the Tanakh "old testament" implies that it has all been abrogated and can be ignored.

Now, what was the Noahic Covenant? What was the Abrahamic Covenant? And what was the Mosaic Covenant? All 3 of these are separate covenants made by God, with the all three still in effect and not abrogated by the New Covenant, and are all three mentioned in the Tanakh. And all three of these covenants I referred to are made in perpetuity. They last until there is a new heaven and new earth.

The Noahic covenant, that God would never destroy the entire earth by water again. That is still in effect and has not been abrogated by the New Covenant. If it does, then God is a liar. It might not seem so to people in Texas recently, but it is still in effect.

Genesis 8:21 (NKJV Strong's,) And the Lord smelled a soothing aroma. Then the Lord said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man's sake, although the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.

Likewise, the Abrahamic Covenant is still in effect and will be so as long as the sun rises and sets, the moon gives off its reflected light, and the waves are roaring on the sea shore. The New Covenant does not abrogate that one either, or again, God is a liar.

Jeremiah 31:35-36 (NKJV Strong's,) Thus says the Lord,
Who gives the sun for a light by day,
The ordinances of the moon and the stars for a light by night,
Who disturbs the sea,
And its waves roar
(The Lord of hosts is His name):
36 “If those ordinances depart
From before Me, says the Lord,
Then the seed of Israel shall also cease
From being a nation before Me forever.”

The Mosaic Covenant (Torah or "Law"). Those that choose to live under the Mosaic Covenant will be judged by the Mosaic Covenant. Romans 2:12. And as Yeshua Himself said:

Matthew 5:18 (Complete Jewish Bible) Yes indeed! I tell you that until heaven and earth pass away, not so much as a yud or a stroke will pass from the Torah — not until everything that must happen has happened

And the only way to get out of that one is to flee to the Messiah, which is basis of the New Covenant, and be free of the penalty of the Torah (Law)

If you are denying that God has said that all of the promises are fulfilled in Christ, without exception, then it is yourself who is calling God a liar.

How is the Noahic promise fulfilled in Christ? As the Heir of all things, God has bequeathed Him the earth and all within it. Similarly, all else as part of every other OT promise has been bequeathed to Him.

This then means that He has complete freedom to do with all of His bequests as He will. So for example, Jerusalem which is below now gives way to Jerusalem which is above (Galatians 4:26, Hebrews 12:22). The natural now gives way to the spiritual (1 Corinthians 15:46). If Christ were to choose to eliminate or modify the Noahic promise, as the Heir, He has been given the right to do so by His Father.

Your reversion to Jewish interpretation is a telltale sign of dispensational carnality and spiritual vacuity, reminiscent of Christ's confrontations with the Pharisees, of whom His denunciations are epic (Matthew 23). Paul upbraids them and their ignorance thus:

Acts 13
27 For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him.

To refuse to recognize the significance of the revocation of an Old Testament/Covenant by a New is to deny the very definition, meaning, and operation of a covenant in both the temporal and spiritual realms.

 

[Copperhead]

Ok, then. You choose to see it that way, that is your prerogative. I didn't revert to anything. It is simply what scripture says. And I know in whom I have placed my trust. He is a God who delights in making and keeping his promises.

If He is not faithful to keep those promises He made and I listed, then our salvation is in jeopardy as well, because that is based on a promise. I don't worship Allah, who is capricious, changes his mind, and does anything he wants, anytime he wants. I worship YHVH who is reliable, trustworthy and His word is His bond. Your description of what God can do is more in tune with Allah.

I counter your assertion. You might want to rethink your position. God made those promises and put the highest form of assurance on them that He could.. His name. And there is nothing higher to The Lord than the credibility of His Name.

Your call. Your decision. Your future.

 

[BABerean2]

Now, what was the Noahic Covenant? What was the Abrahamic Covenant? And what was the Mosaic Covenant? All 3 of these are separate covenants made by God, with the all three still in effect and not abrogated by the New Covenant, and are all three mentioned in the Tanakh. And all three of these covenants I referred to are made in perpetuity. They last until there is a new heaven and new earth.

You must ignore the following scripture to make the statement above work.

Below the Apostle Paul reveals that the Sinai covenant was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "until" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made. This reveals the temporary nature of the Sinai Covenant.

Gal 3:16　 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.　
Gal 3:17　 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.　
Gal 3:18　 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.　
Gal 3:19　 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.　


In the next chapter Paul compares the Sinai Covenant to "bondage" and compels the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai Covenant.

Gal 4:24　 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.　
Gal 4:25　 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.　
Gal 4:26　 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.　
Gal 4:27　 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.　
Gal 4:28　 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.　
Gal 4:29　 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.　
Gal 4:30　 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.　
Gal 4:31　 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.　


In the verse below we find that there was a change of the law.

Heb 7:12　 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.　


The New Covenant has made the Old Covenant "obsolete".

Heb 8:13　 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.　

Below we find that we are not come to the mountain that burns with fire, but instead to the New Covenant of Mount Zion.

Heb 12:18　 For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,　
Heb 12:19　 And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more:　
Heb 12:20　 (For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart:　
Heb 12:21　 And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake　
Heb 12:22　 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,　
Heb 12:23　 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,　
Heb 12:24　 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.　


The battle between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant began in Acts chapter 15 and continues to the present day.

Col 2:16　 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:　
Col 2:17　 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.　

.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Jacob’s Trouble and the Great Tribulation

It is the land of Judea and Jerusalem that went thru it....Josephus, the Olivet Discourse and Revelation go together like white on rice......the Jews already went thru Jacob's trouble.....Keep it simple

Daniel 12:1
"In that time Michael shall stand-up, the chief/prince, the great, the one standing over sons of thy people;
And a time of distress, which not occurred since to become of a nation, until that time.
And in that time, thy people shall escape, everyone being found being written in scroll.

Matthew 24:21
for then shall be great Tribulation, such as was not from the beginning of world till now, no, nor may be becoming

Who is Jesus talking to in Luke 21 and 23?

Luk 21:
23 “But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people.
Luke 23:
28 But Jesus turned to them and said, “Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for Me, but weep for yourselves and for your children.
29 Behold! the days are coming when people will say, ‘Blessed are the barren women, the wombs that never bore, and breasts that never nursed.’
30 At that time, ‘They will say to the mountains, “Fall on us,” and to the hills, “Cover us.”’

Reve 6:16
And they are saying to the mountains and to the rocks: 'Be falling on us! and hide us! from Face of the One sitting upon the Throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb" [Hosea 10:8/Luke 23:30]


The Destruction of Jerusalem - George Peter Holford, 1805AD
The Destruction Of JERUSALEM
An Absolute and Irresistible PROOF OF THE DIVINE ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY:

The day on which Titus encompassed Jerusalem, was the feast of the Passover; and it is deserving of the very particular attention of the reader, that this was the anniversary of that memorable period in which the Jews crucified their Messiah!.........................

Meanwhile the horrors of famine grew still more melancholy and afflictive.
The Jews, for of food were at length compelled to eat their belts, their sandals, the skins of their shields, dried grass, and even the ordure of oxen.
In the depth or this horrible extremity, a Jewess of noble family urged by the intolerable cravings of hunger, slew her infant child, and prepared it for a meal ; and had actually eaten one half thereof, when the soldiers, allured by tile smell of food, threatened her with instant death if she refused to discover it.'Intimidated by this menace, she immediately produced the remains of her son, which petrified them with horror..................
A Roman soldier, urged, as he declared, by a divine impulse, regardless of the command of Titus climbed on the shoulders of another, and threw a flaming brand into the golden window of the Temple, which instantly set the building on fire.

Reve 18:8
by this, in one day shall be arriving the blows of Her, death and sorrow and famine; and in fire She shall be being burned, that strong Lord, the God, the one judging Her

No, my dear LLOJ, Jacob's Trouble and the 70th week of Daniel, together with Jesus amplification of them in His Olivet Discourse, culminating in His second coming, have not yet taken place. Clearly delineated in the OP

Quasar92

I disagree with the OP view and premise that it is still future,

Btw, I am a Preterist/Amillennialist which views us already in the 1000 yr period....It is an orthodox view, unlike "full Preterism" which, unfortunately, is considered a radical unorthodox view.
So I chose Amillennialism as the next best choice......

Difference between amillennialism & preterism

Amillennialism is a specific position in regard to the Millennium, it says that the Millennium isn't intended to describe a literal period of time, but rather describes Christ's reign at the Father's right hand until the time of His coming.

Preterism is a position in regard to prophetic interpretation, sometimes contrasted with Futurism and Historicism. Historicism would argue, for example, that what St. John the Revelator wrote has had an ongoing fulfillment since his day to ours, the earliest Protestants were Historicists, which led Luther, Calvin (et al) to conclude that the Papacy fulfilled the eschatological role of Antichrist and Beast (not the person of the Pope, per se, but rather the office of Pope). Futurists would posit that all or most of everything in the Revelation will be fulfilled at a heretofore unspecified point in the future, Dispensationalists fall in this category (and they are also Premillennialists).

Preterism, on the other hand, states that much (partial) or all (full) of what St. John wrote, or what Jesus spoke about in the Olivet Discourse (etc) had its fulfillment, or was primarily about, stuff that took place in the first century and the time of John himself. Hyper-Preterism goes so far as to argue that the Parousia--the Second Coming--occurred in 70 AD when the Roman army destroyed the Temple, they believe this was a visitation of Judgment, the return or appearing of Christ, against the old order represented by Jerusalem and the Temple. Hyper-Preterism is regarded as heretical by mainstream Christianity as the Historic Creeds are clear that the Lord will return at the end to raise the dead bodily (Hyper-Preterism denies the resurrection of the body, which is, again, heretical).

The two involve different aspects of eschatology, one could be both Amillennial and a Preterist, one could be Amillennial but not a Preterist. Luther, Calvin and other early Protestants were Amillennialists and Historicists, one can also be Amillennial and a Futurist.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[jgr]

Ok, then. You choose to see it that way, that is your prerogative. I didn't revert to anything. It is simply what scripture says. And I know in whom I have placed my trust. He is a God who delights in making and keeping his promises.

If He is not faithful to keep those promises He made and I listed, then our salvation is in jeopardy as well, because that is based on a promise. I don't worship Allah, who is capricious, changes his mind, and does anything he wants, anytime he wants. I worship YHVH who is reliable, trustworthy and His word is His bond. Your description of what God can do is more in tune with Allah.

I counter your assertion. You might want to rethink your position. God made those promises and put the highest form of assurance on them that He could.. His name. And there is nothing higher to The Lord than the credibility of His Name.

Your call. Your decision. Your future.

Do you consider God's plan in Christ, foreordained before the foundation of the world (1 Peter 1:19-20), to change from the old to the new, to be capricious?

Romans 7:6
But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

2 Corinthians 3:6
Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

Ephesians 4:24
And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

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

Hebrews 9:15
And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Revelation 21:5
And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

 

[Copperhead]

That all sounds great and is scripture, but it doesn't negate anything.

Some implication is being made that the New Covenant abrogated everything that came before it. That the New Covenant replaces the other covenants, en masse, that are in the Tanakh, or OT.

One covenant I failed to mention when I listed those others... the Davidic Covenant. That one is part of the OT as well. Has it been done away with also? Anyone who knows of the Messiah should be familiar with that one. It was confirmed to David, reconfirmed thru the Prophets, and Gabriel confirmed it to Mary in Luke. My assertion would be, that if one thinks that covenant has been done away with, then they have a different Messiah than Yeshua, and thus have a bigger problem than these covenants.

One thing that comes out of these types of discussions, is that many really haven't done their homework on these things. "new" doesn't mean that everything that came before it is no longer. And as I have outlined, there are many covenants listed in the scripture. It is myopic to think that the OT was just one great big all inclusive covenant that was done away with.

The Mosaic Covenant, or "the Law", was just one of many covenants that God made in the Tanakh. That is why it being called the "Old Testament" is a name that implies a negative. "The Law" points to the Messiah. So of course, when the Messiah came, it no longer holds sway on those that place their hope and trust in the Messiah that it points to. But it still is valid. It has only been replaced by the New Covenant for those that place their trust in Messiah. The real name for "The Law" is Torah, which means instruction or teaching. It is the root from which the word Morah, or "teacher" comes from.

As far as those who have placed their trust in Messiah, Yeshua, the Torah has no claim to them. The penalty of it was nailed to His cross. For those that don't place their hope and trust in Yeshua, the Torah or "the Law" is still very much in effect and will be the basis of judgement upon them. This is why Yeshua said that not the smallest letter, the Yod, or the least stroke of the pen will be abrogated from Torah till all be fulfilled. I don't see Messiah reigning on David's throne from Jerusalem (the Davidic Covenant) yet. so I get the distinct impression that all has not been fulfilled.

 

[BABerean2]

This is why Yeshua said that not the smallest letter, the Yod, or the least stroke of the pen will be abrogated from Torah till all be fulfilled. I don't see Messiah reigning on David's throne from Jerusalem (the Davidic Covenant) yet. so I get the distinct impression that all has not been fulfilled.

Joh 19:30　 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.　

When the construction of a new house is completed, the contract to build that house becomes "obsolete".

He built us a New House out of two pieces of wood and a handful of nails.


In the passage below Paul compels the Galatian believers to "cast out" the covenant of "bondage".


Gal 4:24　 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.　
Gal 4:25　 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.　
Gal 4:26　 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.　
Gal 4:27　 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.　
Gal 4:28　 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.　
Gal 4:29　 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.　
Gal 4:30　 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.　
Gal 4:31　 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.


.　

 

[Steve Petersen]

Jeremiah 31:31-34

Can anyone read this passage and say that the New Covenant has fully come to pass? Does everyone know God?

 

[sdowney717]

Jeremiah 31:31-34

Can anyone read this passage and say that the New Covenant has fully come to pass? Does everyone know God?

But this all is not all mankind, it is to those of the New Covenant which God makes.
They will know Christ and Christ will know them, but this promise is not for them outside the New Covenant. To them which are outside, they have no forgiveness of sins, they experience God's wrath.

31 Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband unto them, saith Jehovah.

33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith Jehovah: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people: 34 and they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know Jehovah; for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith Jehovah: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.

 

[Steve Petersen]

But this all is not all mankind, it is to those of the New Covenant which God makes.
They will know Christ and Christ will know them, but this promise is not for them outside the New Covenant. To them which are outside, they have no forgiveness of sins, they experience God's wrath.

31 Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband unto them, saith Jehovah.

33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith Jehovah: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people: 34 and they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know Jehovah; for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith Jehovah: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.

Israel and Judah will ALL know the Lord. Has this happened yet?

 

[sdowney717]

Israel and Judah will ALL know the Lord. Has this happened yet?

Hebrews uses this exact scripture to refer to the church, not Israel and Judah.
The significant part is 'NEW COVENANT'
Which also includes gentile and jew.
Hebrews 8:7-13New King James Version (NKJV)
A New Covenant
7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. 8 Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— 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 did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 11 None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”

13 In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

 

[sdowney717]

The New Covenant, you can not exclude Gentiles.

Jeremiah 31:31
[ A New Covenant ] “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—
Matthew 26:28
For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Mark 14:24
And He said to them, “This is My blood of the newcovenant, which is shed for many.
Luke 22:20
Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you.
1 Corinthians 11:25
In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
2 Corinthians 3:6
who also made us sufficient as ministers of the newcovenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
2 Corinthians 3:7
[ Glory of the New Covenant ] But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away,
Hebrews 8:7
[ A New Covenant ] For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second.
Hebrews 8:8
Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a newcovenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah—
Hebrews 8:13
In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
Hebrews 9:15
And for this reason He is the Mediator of the newcovenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.
Hebrews 12:24
to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

 

[BABerean2]

Israel and Judah will ALL know the Lord. Has this happened yet?

Heb 12:22　 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,　
Heb 12:23　 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,　
Heb 12:24　 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.　


In the excellent post by my Brother above, we find the passage from Jeremiah 31:31-34 repeated word-for-word in Hebrews 8:6-13 and clearly fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6.

It is also found in Hebrews 10:16-18.

On the day of Pentecost Peter addressed the crowd as "men of Judea", then as "men of Israel", and in Acts 2:36 as "all the house of Israel".
On that day about 3,000 Israelites became a part of the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah chapter 31. During the first few years of the Church almost all of its members were Israelites.

Therefore, for those in the New Covenant Jeremiah 31:31-34 has come to pass.

.

 

[jgr]

Some implication is being made that the New Covenant abrogated everything that came before it. That the New Covenant replaces the other covenants, en masse, that are in the Tanakh, or OT.

There is no implication about it. It is an indisputable legal reality. As I've shown previously, the following clause, or its equivalent, which appears in every legally admissible Will and Testament, explicitly states what is part of the foundational legal characteristic of a Will and Testament:

"I HEREBY REVOKE all former Wills and other testamentary dispositions by me at any time therefore made and declare this to be my Last Will and Testament."

A revoked will and testament is null and void in every aspect.

"Last Will and Testament" is the logical equivalent of a New Will and Testament, until a newer one is created.

Christ affirms His New Testament:
Matthew 26
27 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

I don't see Messiah reigning on David's throne from Jerusalem (the Davidic Covenant) yet. so I get the distinct impression that all has not been fulfilled.

You're looking through the wrong eyes.

I presume that you claim to believe prophecy literally. Therefore, to be consistent and true to the definition of "literal", your claim must be that David's throne refers to David's literal original throne.

David's literal original throne was destroyed long ago by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:8–10).

If God had intended for Christ to sit on David's literal throne, why did He not preserve it? He certainly could have. It would have been an unassailable case for literal fulfillment.

But He didn't.

I believe David's throne to refer, not literally but symbolically, to Christ's throne in heavenly Jerusalem, from which He has been reigning since His resurrection (Acts 2:29-36).

You believe David's throne to refer, partially symbolically (because it will not be the original throne), to a future literal throne in earthly Jerusalem.

I believe Christ is King now.

You don't believe He is yet, and you do not know how long it will be until He is.

For me, the choice is easy.

 

[Copperhead]

It is totally up to you to see it that way, jgr. We just have a different Messiah and a different God.

Luke 1:32-33 (NKJV Strong's,) He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. 33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”

That is the Davidic Covenant that was promised to David. Established and confirmed in 2 Samuel 7, 1 Chronicles 17:11-14, etc. An unconditional covenant God made with David. Messiah has never assumed David's throne, ruling from Jerusalem yet.

Messiah is not King over Israel now. The Father has not finished doing what He promised to do....

Psalms 110:1 (NKJV Strong's,) The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”

Isaiah 9:6-7 (NKJV Strong's,) For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of His government and peace
There will be no end,
Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,
To order it and establish it with judgment and justice
From that time forward, even forever.
The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

Jeremiah 3:17 (NKJV Strong's,) “At that time Jerusalem shall be called The Throne of the Lord, and all the nations shall be gathered to it, to the name of the Lord, to Jerusalem. No more shall they follow the dictates of their evil hearts.

Jeremiah 33:20-21 (NKJV Strong's,) “Thus says the Lord: ‘If you can break My covenant with the day and My covenant with the night, so that there will not be day and night in their season, 21 then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant, so that he shall not have a son to reign on his throne, and with the Levites, the priests, My ministers.

Throne is not a literal seat or chair, it is a position of authority as King ruling over literal, physical Israel. Even in secular situations, ascending to the throne is not ascending to a literal seat or chair, it is a position of ruling authority. Kings and queens throughout history have swapped literal seats for ones they prefer to camp their back side on, but they are still the ruling monarch. They are still on the throne. And Yeshua still has not reigned and ruled over physical Israel yet. And that means there will be physical, literal Israel to rule over, as promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, known as the Abrahamic Covenant.

And yes, I do believe that covenant is literal and the promise that Gabriel stated to Mary confirming it as well. It wasn't a figurative angel confirming a figurative covenant made by a figurative God.

You claim that all of the OT is abrogated by the NT. Very well. You have called YHVH a liar and your faith is not in His Messiah, Yeshua, if you hold to that position, but in another god and another messiah, if any at all. It doesn't get any clearer than that. Get ticked off at me if you want to, I really could care less. You have called the One I have placed my trust in a liar that doesn't keep His promises, even unto His own Son.

I try never to get all heated in forum threads, or accuse people of falsehood, but when someone makes blasphemous statements like you are, I have real issues just sitting still while they impugn my Lord's character and honor. There is such a thing as righteous anger, and no, it is not a sin unless I were to wish harm on someone.

I leave you to your allegorical nonsense and the Lord. Explain it to Him that way on that day that He was just making allegorical promises and see where it gets you.