1 John 4:1

Active Member
Apr 19, 2018
222
73
SILVER SPRING
✟18,981.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
Maybe this context to Matthew 5:19 would be helpful to consider. First we see the same word used to talk about loosing (seemingly in reference to the community/church being given authority to decide in interpreting commands and whether to forgive sins) in Matthew 16 and 18.

Mat 5:19
Whosoever therefore shall break G3089 one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Mat 16:19
And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose G3089 on earth shall be loosed G3089 in heaven.

Mat 18:18
Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose G3089 on earth shall be loosed G3089 in heaven.

Second, when Yeshua/Jesus refers to the "kingdom of heaven" is he not referencing also those entering in after he died as well?

(EDIT: didn't realize at first it wasn't the same word as "fulfill" so I changed some of the following) Third, when he says in Matthew 5:18 "Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished." even if Christ is referring to only the things he accomplishes (which is doubtful) there are other prophecies that he will accomplish in his second coming. Also most obviously heaven and earth haven't passed away yet. So I'm curious of your thoughts on this. Interestingly Matthew 6:10 uses the same word to tell us to pray that God's will be accomplished on earth:
copyChkboxOff.gif
Mat 5:18
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. [ASV says "accomplished"] G1096

Mat 6:10
Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done G1096 in earth, as it isin heaven.

". . . had not been fully taught about the fact that the ceremonial observances of the Law were no longer of any significance."
It doesn't say that though. In fact it seems like either Paul is misleading James and the other elders (which I think might cause problems interpreting the book of James) or Paul is agreeing that he doesn't teach against Moses:
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord. And they said to him, “You see, brother, how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law; 21 but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise theirchildren nor to walk according to the customs. 22 What then? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. 23 Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. 24 Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the law. (Acts 21 NKJV)

This especially makes more sense to me in light of Acts 28:17 and Acts 25:8. Also Acts 6:13-14 (says the accusations that Yeshua "changed" the law are false). However, I guess you can say that Yeshua didn't "change" and didn't "destroy" the law but "fulfilled" part of it making it no longer apply.
However, practically this would be changing or destroying it for us. This also makes either Paul or James look confused here. It also is confusing theologically. I was always confused about this when I believed like this and many atheists who read the Bible will immediately wonder why Christians don't believe in all the old testament law anymore. (the explanation by Christians is anything but straightforward)
"Do you see a degree that is thrown away or do you see a completed valued credential that has been framed and put on display? its in that answer where you will find the values of those who look at the law as completed and no longer under its obligation."
The degree is not a law and it's not instructions. It is a recognition that you fulfilled the requirements of the courses. However, the courses were for a set amount of time, and in the past anyway so this is circular reasoning to use that example to argue that the requirements of the law aren't for now. Yeshua walked out the law perfectly hence fulfilling it just like he fulfilled the prophecies about him but this validates the law and the prophecies.
"This required seven days, but THAT OFFERING WAS NEVER OFFERED! Why? There was an attempt on Paul's life before the seven day were up, and he ended up being rescued by the Romans, and eventually taken to Caesarea."
Are you saying Paul was bluffing about offering something and didn't really believe he should? By the way I think this is about the Nazarite vow but there is disagreement on this point. Interesting discussion here: Did Paul take the Nazarite vow in Cenchreae? If so, why this vow?

"And the common teaching fails to show that the Ten Commandments were embedded in the New Covenant and are now embedded in the Law of Christ, which is the Law of Love (as presented in the two greatest commandments within the Torah). "
Fourth the law in the new covenant is the same since it refers to it as the law (Torah) in the context of the old testament and it was always about love. We just have a harder time seeing it that way from our distance from the culture and our distance from God spiritually and intellectually (many of the rituals of the priests don't make sense to me but I'm sure they are important)
Jer 31 NKJV
31 “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— 32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day thatI took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.”

Lastly the temple veil was torn but I have my doubts as to what that means. For instance, many scholars see similarities with Essene beliefs in early Jewish Christianity and the Essenes were critical of the temple system. I don't know if the early Christians went as far as the Essenes did in their criticism because there were obviously differences between the groups. However, my point is the tearing of the temple veil may be a warning against the temple system as it was at the time, not against the temple for all time, also see Ezekiel 44-48

] ’One major piece of evidence supporting that John was indeed a Qumranite is found in Josephus, who wrote of the Essenes, “They neglect wedlock, but choose other persons’ children, while they are yet pliable, and fit for learning; and esteem them to be of their own kindred, and form them according to their own manners.”’ . . . ’In conclusion, there is strong evidence that John was indeed a Qumranite, brought up at Qumran after being adopted. He was either expelled or voluntarily left before completing the two-year initiatory process and lived on his own in the Judean wilderness on the east side of the Jordan River, making his own clothes, and eating whatever he could find. For some differences between John and the Qumranites, be it in belief or practice, we have only one answer, asserted by LaSor: “How the Spirit works we do not know. We have enough records of men who claimed that they were, or were believed by others to have been, filled with the Spirit, that we can make a few observations. The Spirit uses holy men; the Spirit makes use of contemporary situations; the Spirit particularly works through the scriptures. We find in John something of each of these elements.”32’ On page 45 of: Farnes, Alan Taylor. “John the Baptist and the Qumran Connection.” Studia Antiqua, vol. 9, Apr. 2011, pp. 29–45., https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi...tpsredir=1&article=1126&context=studiaantiqua

”Jesus truly shed his blood on the eve of Easter at the time of the immolation of the lambs. In all likelihood, however, he celebrated the Passover with his disciples in accordance with the Qumran 49 calendar, hence, at least one day earlier; he celebrated it without a lamb, like the Qumran community which did not recognize Herod’s temple and was waiting for the new temple.” Ratzinger, Joseph Aloisius. “HOMILY OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI.” MASS OF THE LORD’S SUPPER | HOMILY OF HIS HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI, The Holy See, Vatican State, 5 Apr. 2007, 5 April 2007: Mass of the Lord's Supper | BENEDICT XVI
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Micah888

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2018
1,091
778
81
CALGARY
✟21,176.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The sacrificial system was man made...
Not if you take the entire Bible as the Word of God, and the instructions and commandments regarding the sacrificial system as coming directly from God to Moses. We cannot believe some part of the Bible and disbelieve others. Please note (Lev 1:1,2):

And the LORD called unto Moses
, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying, speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock.
 
Upvote 0

1 John 4:1

Active Member
Apr 19, 2018
222
73
SILVER SPRING
✟18,981.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
'Fulfill' is a Jewish idiom which means 'to do.' Here are several examples taken from Jewish literature. The earliest is from the Misnah:

Midrash
Midrash Rabbah - Exodus 30:22

22. Another explanation of NOW THESE ARE THE ORDINANCES. Both the heathen and Israel have judges, and you do not know what difference there is between both. It can be compared to a sick man whose doctor paid him a visit and then said to the family: ' Give him to eat whatever he wants.' When he came to the other, he left word: ' Take care not to let him eat that and that thing.' When he was asked, `The first, thou didst allow to eat whatever he wishes, and the second, thou didst forbid certain things,' his reply was: `The first has no chance of recovering; for this reason did I allow him to eat what he fancies; but the second will yet live and therefore did I command strict caution in his diet.' Similarly the heathen have judges, but neither study the Torah nor fulfil it, as it says, Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and ordinances whereby they should not live (Ezek.XX, 25),1 but with regard to the commandments it says, Which if a man do, he shall live by them (Lev. XVIII, 5).

Exodus Rabbah 40:1

R. Hoshaya said: Anyone who has knowledge but lacks the fear of sin, really has nothing, just as a carpenter who has no tools with him is not a real carpenter; because the bolts which guard learning are the fear of sin, as it says, And the fear of the Lord is its treasure-house (Isa. XXXIII, 6). R. Johanan said: If one knows the Torah but does not fulfil it, it were better for him that he had not been born,

Numbers Rabbah 3:12

He was called Kohath for this reason: You read: If the iron be blunt (Eccl. X, 10), which means, if you perceive that the heavens have become `blunt' and refuse to send down rain, having become like iron- as you read: 'And I will make your heaven as iron'-be assured that it is as a punishment for the non-observance of the Torah; for it is written, And one do not whet the edge (ib.), that is, because they did not fulfil the commandments of the Torah which was given to them by God face to face-as you read, The Lord spoke with you face to face, etc. (Deut. V, 4)

Numbers Rabbah 11:1
The wise shall inherit honour (Prov. III, 35) applies to Israel who are called wise when they fulfil the Torah and the commandments; as it says, Observe therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding, etc. (Deut. IV, 6)

Deuteronomy Rabbah 1:21

The Rabbis say: Moses declared before God: `Master of the Universe, just because the Gentiles have not been commanded to observe the Sabbath, wilt Thou show favour to them if they do observe it?' God replied to him: ' Do you really fear this? By your life, even if they fulfil all the commandments in the Torah, yet will I cause them to fall before you.' Whence this? Because the text says, BEHOLD, I HAVE BEGUN TO DELIVER UP BEFORE THEE.

Deuteronomy Rabbah 7:4

TO OBSERVE TO DO ALL HIS COMMANDMENTS (XXVIII, 1). R. Simeon b. Halafta said: If one learns the words of the Torah and does not fulfil them, his punishment is more severe than that of him who has not learnt at all.

Deuteronomy Rabbah 11:6

Halachah: When a Jew goes up to read the Law, he is not permitted to commence reading it before he has recited the blessings. First he must recite the blessings and then he reads. And thus Moses, when he had the privilege of receiving the Torah, first recited a blessing, and then he read it. R. Eleazar asked: What was the blessing which Moses recited before reading it? [It was], Blessed art Thou, O Lord, King of the Universe, who hast chosen this law and sanctified it and hast found pleasure in them who fulfil it. He did not say, ' in them that labour at it,' nor, ' in them who meditate in it,' but, ' in them that fulfil it,' that is to say, in them who carry out the words of the Torah.

Numbers Rabbah 10:8

For thus have the Sages said: Keep away from a small sin lest it lead you to a grievous one; run to fulfil a small commandment, for it will lead you to an important one.

Talmud
Chagigah 4b

Samuel went and brought Moses with him, Saying to him: Perhaps, Heaven forfend,21 I am summoned to Judgment: arise with me,22 for there is nothing that thou hast written in the Torah, which I did not fulfil.

Arachin 22a

R. Papa said: The paying of a debt is a commandment and [minor] orphans are not obliged to fulfil the commandment.

Mishnah

AVOT 4:9

R. JONATHAN SAID: WHOEVER FULFILS THE TORAH OUT OF [A STATE OF] POVERTY, HIS END [WILL BE] TO FULFIL IT OUT OF [A STATE OF] WEALTH; AND WHOEVER DISCARDS THE TORAH OUT OF [A STATE OF] WEALTH, HIS END [WILL BE] TO DISCARD IT OUT OF [A STATE OF] POVERTY.


Some people use the word 'fulfill' to mean 'finish.' This is not the meaning from within a Jewish religious context about the Torah.

I really want to make sure people don't miss this post because this may explain the meaning of the word "fulfill". I have have heard the scholar David Bivin make the same connection but I just want to make sure we aren't making it in English here. Do you know if the word used is same as Matthew 5:17 or any of the corosponding hebrew words they get from comparing the Tanakh with the Septuagint? G4137 πληρόω - Strong's Greek Lexicon
 
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,089
2,040
Texas
✟95,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Someone posted:

"The account of the stoning of Stephen is maybe one of the most obvious examples of the chosen rejection of truth:

At this they covered their ears, cried out in a loud voice, and rushed together at him."

Stephen's stoning fulfills two things for me -- a statement by Jesus that "there be some standing here that will not taste death" til they see the kingdom come with power (Stephen saw Jesus at right hand of Father right before he tasted death) -- and IMHO, Stephen's stoning marks the end of Daniel's 70th week

(Well, somebody wanted to see some controversy...)
 
  • Informative
Reactions: mkgal1
Upvote 0

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
I really want to make sure people don't miss this post because this may explain the meaning of the word "fulfill". I have have heard the scholar David Bivin make the same connection but I just want to make sure we aren't making it in English here. Do you know if the word used is same as Matthew 5:17 or any of the corosponding hebrew words they get from comparing the Tanakh with the Septuagint? G4137 πληρόω - Strong's Greek Lexicon

In the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT, from about 250 BC) the word pleroo in Greek translates the Hebrew word malei. It almost always means ‘to fill’ But there are other nuances of the word.

Here is the Strong’s definition:

4390. male', maw-lay'; or mala' (Esth. 7 : 5), maw-law'; a prim. root, to fill or (intrans.) be full of, in a wide application (lit. and fig.):--accomplish, confirm, + consecrate, be at an end, be expired, be fenced, fill, fulfil, (be, become, X draw, give in, go) fully (-ly, -ly set, tale), [over-] flow, fulness, furnish, gather (selves, together), presume, replenish, satisfy, set, space, take a [hand-] full, + have wholly.

Here are a couple of places that conform to the idea that malei (equivalent to pleroo in the Greek) can mean ‘to do.’ In the following passage the word seems be used in the sense of to ‘confirm, establish, authenticate.’

1 Ki 1:13 Go and get thee in unto king David, and say unto him, Didst not thou, my lord, O king, swear unto thine handmaid, saying, Assuredly Solomon thy son shall reign after me, and he shall sit upon my throne? why then doth Adonijah reign? 14 Behold, while thou yet talkest there with the king, I also will come in after thee, and confirm (Heb. malei, Gk. pleroo) thy words.

There is another word in Hebrew often translated as ‘fulfil’; it is the word kum. This word is often used by the Sages in the Mishnah and Talmud and means ‘to do, to carry out.' From the following passage you can see that malei and kum are nearly synonymous.

Jer 44:25 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, saying; Ye and your wives have both spoken with your mouths, and fulfilled (malei) with your hand, saying, We will surely perform our vows that we have vowed, to burn incense to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her: ye will surely accomplish (kum) your vows, and surely perform your vows.

So to translate the Greek pleroo of Matthew 5:17 as ‘end, terminate’ is only one possible reading. I believe that the literary/cultural/historical context of this verse lends weight to tranlating pleroo as ‘confirm, authenticate’ and probably also ‘do, keep.’
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 John 4:1
Upvote 0

1 John 4:1

Active Member
Apr 19, 2018
222
73
SILVER SPRING
✟18,981.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,089
2,040
Texas
✟95,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Mat 16:28
Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Mar 9:1
And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

Luk 9:27
But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.

about Stephen:
Act 7:54
When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.
Act 7:55
But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
Act 7:56
And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
Act 7:57
Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,
Act 7:58
And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.
Act 7:59
And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.
Act 7:60
And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

1 John 4:1

Active Member
Apr 19, 2018
222
73
SILVER SPRING
✟18,981.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
The definition says this:

Pleroo -
2c3) to fulfil, i.e. to cause God’s will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God’s promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfillment.​

Jesus didn't "end the law" (the first 5 books of the Bible)....but He *did* end the Ancient Jews misinterpretation of it (keeping it only for them and not for the whole world, for instance). I'm not typically a fan of John Piper...but I do agree with this quote of his:

"Jesus came to fulfill all that was written in the Law and the Prophets. All of it was pointing to him, even where it is not explicitly prophetic. He accomplishes what the Law required."​

When He cleansed the Temple (for instance) He was fulfilling Leviticus 14:33-53. He was also fulfilling the parable of the Wicked Vinedressers in Matthew 21.


That's not literal. Is the Temple still standing in Jerusalem or was it destroyed in 70 AD? That's the Ancient Jewish understanding of "heaven and earth".



If you believe this as you're presenting it, then I sure hope you're not eating shellfish nor wearing mixed materials in your clothing.
I don't agree with you here but I have to give you credit because this is the best explanation I've seen of how to have the law not apply today and be compatible with Matthew 5:18. You still have to deal with the "all things are accomplished" part though. :)

"but He *did* end the Ancient Jews misinterpretation of it (keeping it only for them and not for the whole world, for instance)." That's interesting so up until 70 AD the law was still in effect but will it be back in effect when the temple is rebuilt? Ezekiel 44-48 By the way I know Ken and he doesn't eat shellfish or wear linen and wool mixture :) The later is pretty hard find nowadays anyway.
 
Upvote 0

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
I don't agree with you here but I have to give you credit because this is the best explanation I've seen of how to have the law not apply today and be compatible with Matthew 5:18. You still have to deal with the "all things are accomplished" part though. :)

"but He *did* end the Ancient Jews misinterpretation of it (keeping it only for them and not for the whole world, for instance)." That's interesting so up until 70 AD the law was still in effect but will it be back in effect when the temple is rebuilt? Ezekiel 44-48 By the way I know Ken and he doesn't eat shellfish or wear linen and wool mixture :) The later is pretty hard find nowadays anyway.

Was the Law still in effect when Solomon's Temple was destroyed? Were the Jews exempt from it then?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 John 4:1
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
Dietrhich Bonhoeffer in 'The Cost of Discipleship' says this about Matthew 5:17-20:

This is the law of the Old Covenant, not a new law, but the one old law, to which the rich young man and the tempting scribe were referred as the revealed will of God. It becomes a new commandment only because Christ binds his disciples to the law. His concern is not for a better law; than that of the Pharisees. It is one and the same, it is the law which must remain and be carried out in every letter until the end of the world, which must be fulfilled to the letter. Jesus has in fact nothing to add to the commandments of God, except this, that He keeps them. He fulfills the law and, and he tells us so Himself, therefore it must be true. He fulfills the law down to the last iota.
 
Upvote 0

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
I like crawfish etouffe.
I wear clothing of mixed fabrics.
But I have never boiled a young goat in its mother's milk.

As a Gentile, you were never under the Law to begin with. It was given to Israel. The only commands God seems to have given to Gentiles were given to Noah.

Mock the Law if you wish, but in doing so you also mock the God who gave it.
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,560
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,895.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
just because something is completed doesn't mean it is devalued and thrown away. It doesn't seem you give this argument a lot of thought and only present it in a very narrow focus which forces me to think you're being irresponsible and are more agenda driven then truth driven.

Go to your office and look at it's wall what do you see? Do you see a degree that is thrown away or do you see a completed valued credential that has been framed and put on display? its in that answer where you will find the values of those who look at the law as completed and no longer under its obligation.
Like I said to @Micah888 I can't make my point on this forum without getting banned. I just can't... there is something I can say, and prove... but it goes against the mainstream teaching and I am handcuffed. So... just do as you are convicted when it come to God's Instructions as will I.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

1 John 4:1

Active Member
Apr 19, 2018
222
73
SILVER SPRING
✟18,981.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
@Anto9us Mat 16:28 is a fascinating verse. I disagree with that interpretation of it because I think he was talking about a literal precursor to the kingdom on earth through the people of God. In addition Matthew 10:23 makes this more clear I think: "`And whenever they may persecute you in this city, flee to the other, for verily I say to you, ye may not have completed the cities of Israel till the Son of Man may come." (Matthew 10:23) I'll have to quote my post in this thread. If you want to respond it please go to this thread: Taking Luke 14:33 literally I don't want to derail the current thread.

@St_Worm2 Thanks so much for your very thoughtful critique of my theory.


In short because of verses like Luke 12:29-34 Matthew 6:19-21 "where your treasure is there your heart will be also" More lengthy would be: I also think the kingdom of God and the identical kingdom of heaven were movements of people in addition to the spiritual kingdom in heaven. I think the movement of people was called this because it was a precursor to the full spiritual kingdom of heaven. In the new testament I think there is a different situation after Christ ascended with the coming of the holy spirit at Pentecost John 16:7 that would call people to a closer knit kingdom. (in terms of church communities like in the book of Acts) Also Christ said "all authority on heaven and on earth has been given to me." Matthew 28:18 In a similar way, before there was Israel God saw the need for more community and created Israel and all the rituals and civil laws that held it together. (also see Luke 2:25)

This would basically be the next level community in the form of communal churches like Acts. John the baptist prepared the way for Christ's movement by saying: if one has two cloaks give to him who has none, Luke 3:11 and he came to turn the hearts of the children back to the fathers and vice versa. Luke 1:17 However Jesus came and said that anyone who does the will of the father is his family. Matthew 12:49 (John strengthened the family unit and Jesus extended it) Here's something from a document on this using YLT (which uses "reign" instead of kingdom)

The Kingdom of Heaven" or "the reign of God" is establishing God's reign over and through the people of God: ". . . the reign of God is within you." (Luke 17:21) "Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the reign of God;" (Luke 18:16) Considering John 16:7 the coming of the Holy Spirit to the Church in Acts was likely the fulfillment of the following verses:
"Verily I say to you, there are certain of those standing here who shall not taste of death till they may see the Son of Man coming in his reign.'" (Matthew 16:28)
"`And whenever they may persecute you in this city, flee to the other, for verily I say to you, ye may not have completed the cities of Israel till the Son of Man may come." (Matthew 10:23)

While the reign of God or heaven doesn't appear in the old testament, the "kingdom of Yahweh" (translated in YLT "Jehovah") certainly can't be different and is made up of the people of Israel: (1 Chronicles 28:5) (2 Chronicles 13:8)
Also observe these parallels of maybe a disciple who was waiting for a Church like that in Acts: ”Joseph of Arimathea, an honourable counsellor, who also himself was waiting G4327 for the reign of God, came, boldly entered in unto Pilate, and asked the body of Jesus.” (Mark 15:43) (Parallel in Luke 23:51) ”And lo, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name [is] Simeon, and this man is righteous and devout, looking for the comforting G3874 of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him,” (Luke 2:25) Acts 9:31 uses the same word G3874 to describe the work of the holy spirit after Christ. ”Then, indeed, the assemblies throughout all Judea, and Galilee, and Samaria, had peace, being built up, and, going on in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort G3874 of the Holy Spirit, they were multiplied.” (Acts 9:31)

If you have questions on this I would love to expand/explain.


I think it is situational because he gave that command when his apostles and him were living communally. He gave the command in the context of the situation at the time and of those under his authority. I think he later sent the holy spirit to further his authority in the church. If it's not situational then I think there are some serious problems. I already alluded to the problem that there are false christs. (how do you decide where to give your possessions to be distributed to the poor) However the other problem is that if I give up everything to all the people around me who are in need then what have a done permanently except create a new poor person (of myself) ? I think you need community support to fix problems like poverty. You are not supposed to worry about your basic needs but not worrying about your needs (EDIT: and having those needs) is connected with finding the kingdom of heaven (I think a community like the church in Acts that will take care of your basic needs no matter what)

31 “Therefore do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. 33 But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you.
This is also associated with the giving up of possessions: Luke 12:30-34
For the rest of the question see the what I've said earlier (I hope that answers it)


Yes it was addressed to all but the content of the command I think should be understood in context with the common purse their group kept and the fact that when there were possessions given up for the poor it went to the group purse and then was distributed. John 12:5-6


I don't think they would have taken things that literally and gotten naked :) but I can understand the criticism. If it was a hyperbole then it was maybe showing a principle and it meant to love your possessions less. Most people take it that way (I however am weird :) ) EDIT: Mark 10:28 would indicate that Peter thought they had indeed left all and yet he wasn't walking around naked.


I surely cannot and do not believe this is true. There is no issue with doing v26 in all situations because it is an attitude of loving relationships less than Christ. However with v33 there is some underlying context that I think I've explained somewhat and I've explained how Jesus gave this command in a situation already. I will also add to this underlying context that the Essenes also required you to give up all your possession when you joined and they were one of the major three sects of Judaism at the time of Jesus:
"122 Since [they are] despisers of wealth—their communal stock is astonishing—, one cannot find a person among them who has more in terms of possessions. For by a law, those coming into the school must yield up their funds to the order, with the result that in all [their ranks] neither the humiliation of poverty nor the superiority of wealth is detectable, but the assets of each one have been mixed in together, as if they were brothers, to create one fund for all." Josephus on the Essenes - Biblical Archaeology Society

Josephus says "the assets of each one have been mixed in together" yet clothes were very time consuming to make back then and were certainly valuable. So I think we can see here that Josephus would not have taken "give up all possessions" as meaning you needed to "get naked." Basically I'm arguing that people would have understood what "give up your possessions" meant in the religious context of the day.

Sorry for the long post I hope that gives you an idea of why I believe this feel free to just pick apart the parts you find relevant to your interests :) Thanks for humoring my weird theory :) I would answer more people's posts but I don't have time at the moment.
 
Upvote 0