LUKE CHAPTERS 19, 21, 23 AND REVELATION "DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM 70AD"

Luke chapters 19, 20 and 23 showing in Revelation?


  • Total voters
    7

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
1 Cor 9:20
and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law;

Paul is very clear that there are those who were indeed "under the Law" at that time.

Those who choose to follow Moses instead of Jesus. Obviously to God it is Jesus or the highway to destruction.

Paul is merely saying in order to lead those who follow Moses to Christ he is pretending to follow Moses as an under cover operative for Christ.

If after the Cross, no Jew was under the Law as you claim, then any punishment metered out by God to them for thier disobedience to the Law would not be Just.

The Law condemns to death for it brings no salvation, scripture is explicit in this teaching. God judges them by the curse of the Law for being disobedient in not following Christ and not for disobedience in not following the Law of Moses.

God is nothing If He isn't Just.

Your view implies that After the cross of Christ, No Jew could be held responsible for their disobedience to the Law.

No Jew held accountable for disobedience to the Law of Moses but for disobedience in not following Christ who is the Law and the Prophet of God in person

In contrast, scripture confirms that Disobedient Jews were under the Law at the time of Pauls writings. They would be until Christ's Judgment coming at AD70 made obedience to the Law impossible

Who says this? You!

Friend, the 70AD destruction was part and parcel to the Old Covenant curses found in Deuteronomy 28. It was a Curse enforced UNDER the Old Covenant. You can't enforce the terms of a covenant that no longer exists.

Justify your statement in how that is so.

66-70 AD was the fulfillment of Deuteronomy 28:15-68
And brought to pass by the Hand of God exactly as He promised He would do, during the time the Old Covenant was in FULL FORCE.

So your claim is that no more New Covenant work had to be done post-ascension? The inclusion of Gentiles into the covenant years later was unnecessary to the full completion of the New Testament Age?

This is an all too common misreading of Ephesians 4:7-10

The "captivity" that a triumphant King would "lead captive" was his bound enemies. The victorious king would lead a parade through town, marching his bound prisoners in a public display to shame them and gloat over them (Col 1:15 uses this concept too). That is why bible expositors discussing Eph 4:8 often point to the broken dominion of the enemies Satan (1 Jn 3:8; Col 1:15), sin (Rom 6:14), and death (Rom 6:9 ) -- these were the "captivity" that Christ led away as his captives. So the "captivity" one leads captive are one's enemies who have been triumphed over. This notion is also the sense of Psalm 68:17-18 concerning the exodus, Sinai and the defeat of the pagans in the promised land.

Additionally, in the spectacle of the public parade the King receives gifts in homage (Ps 68:18,29,31) and he generously distributes the spoils of war to his own citizens (Ps 68:19). With Christ, he distributes the spoils of his war unto the Church in the form of the charismata given unto mankind, making them Chosen apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and teachers with him (Eph 4:8,11)

Here's Matthew Henry on the subject:

"As great conquerors, when they rode in their triumphal chariots, used to be attended with the most illustrious of their captives led in chains, and were wont to scatter their largesses and bounty among the soldiers and other spectators of their triumphs, so Christ, when he ascended into heaven, as a triumphant conqueror, led captivity captive. It is a phrase used in the Old Testament to signify a conquest over enemies, especially over such as formerly had led others captive; see Jdg. 5:12. Captivity is here put for captives, and signifies all our spiritual enemies, who brought us into captivity before. He conquered those who had conquered us; such as sin, the devil, and death. Indeed, he triumphed over these on the cross; but the triumph was completed at his ascension, when he became Lord over all, and had the keys of death and hades put into his hands

Paradoxal? maybe..
Biblical, Apostolic? Absolutely!
Long AFTER the Crucifixion and 3rd day Resurrection of Jesus, The Old Covenant was still present in the Nation and Christians were entangled in it (Heb 8:13; 2 Cor 3:6-12; Gal 4:24-25; Gal 4:1-5:5). Therefore when Hebrews 10:9 says he "removes the first so that he may establish the second" we know that neither the first had yet been removed (Heb 8:13; Gal 4:24-25; 2 Cor 3:6-12) nor had the second been fully established. AD 30-AD 70 was the transition period under which they were in a process of coming out from underneath the Law. Converts to Christ were being circumcised and asked to keep the Law of Moses at least up until the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. That council only released the gentiles from the practice Law of Moses and Paul was present at the council.

Here is the REAL Paradox of your position:

"For verily I say unto you, Until heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break 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." (Matthew 5:18-19)

Jesus CLEARLY says that UNTIL that time when Heaven and Earth passes, not even the most minute jot nor tittle shall pass from the law until all is fulfilled AND, THEREFORE, whosoever shall break one of these LEAST COMMANDS and shall teach men to do so shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

ToServe, Besides the fact that you are currently holding 2 polar opposite views (1:The Law ended at the cross & 2: Heaven and earth have not yet passed, yet according to Jesus Christ, the law would not pass until Heaven and Earth passed) this gives you a very real dilemma if you believe heaven and earth have NOT passed:

(#1) You are presently breaking even those very LEAST of the commands of the Law of Moses and are teaching others to do so -- therefore you will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven
--OR--
(#2) You are presently doing and teaching even those very least of the 600+ commands of the Law of Moses and therefore shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven

I look forward to hearing whether you are doing #1 or #2 in our day.

Which one are you doing?
 
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Alright, I read both chapters, why I'm not sure. I came away with two texts I believe are the heart of the emphasis:

Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him. (Heb. 9:27:-28)

Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth. (Zech. 4:14)​

The atonement of Christ and the two witnesses, you had a larger point you were trying to make?

The two witnesses are an extension of the Heavenly inner court, but they witness in the outer unmeasured court of the Gentiles. They serve the Lord on earth, whilst those who are redeemed amongst the Heavenly crowd are not ministers but priests who are not trampled upon. The two witnesses represent those of the body of Christ who are persecuted for their testimony.

The inner court is with the temple and the outer is without the temple, yet they are an extension of the Heavenly Temple. The Church has historically fulfilled this purpose and has been trampled upon many times and throughout generations.
 
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him. (Heb. 9:27:-28)

Then said he, These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth. (Zech. 4:14)

Notice the golden oil from the two olive trees (Jews and Gentiles) is being poured out through the ministry of the seven lampstand Menorah that represents the Church.

The testimony of the witnesses is 1260 symbolic days which is the time of 1260 days the Daily Sacrifice is offered through the Menorah as the seven eyes seven Spirits that goes forth in all the earth from pentecost onwards.

The daily sacrifice is the vessels of the temple who are consecrated and they are Holy Spirit believers who offer their bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God--this is your true and proper worship. (Romans 12:1)

The removal of the Daily Sacrifice at the 1260 symbolic day marker then leads to the 1290 days of the Abomination of Desolation being setup again which points to fleshly worship and in the absence of the Holy Spirit.

1335 day marker is when Christ returns to bring salvation.

This sequence, especially 1335 days could not be placed at 70AD but a future time when the Gentile come to be fully accounted for in the Book of Life.
 
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
66-70 AD was the fulfillment of Deuteronomy 28:15-68
And brought to pass by the Hand of God exactly as He promised He would do, during the time the Old Covenant was in FULL FORCE.

You have the wrong context of situation.

So your claim is that no more New Covenant work had to be done post-ascension? The inclusion of Gentiles into the covenant years later was unnecessary to the full completion of the New Testament Age?

New Covenant work continued well after 70AD, even until today as Christ continues to reign through his Cross, but for that to happen the OC priesthood was dissolved and replaced by the Kingly Priesthood of Melchizedek and with that the OC tied to the old priesthood was dissolved and became a desolate house. The hour where no longer a believer will worship according to the outward legal framework temple construct was after the Cornerstone was firmly laid for the Holy Spirit Temple Builder to commence building it until he finishes it at Christ's return when Jesus would have defeated the last enemy.

This is an all too common misreading of Ephesians 4:7-10

The "captivity" that a triumphant King would "lead captive" was his bound enemies. The victorious king would lead a parade through town, marching his bound prisoners in a public display to shame them and gloat over them (Col 1:15 uses this concept too). That is why bible expositors discussing Eph 4:8 often point to the broken dominion of the enemies Satan (1 Jn 3:8; Col 1:15), sin (Rom 6:14), and death (Rom 6:9 ) -- these were the "captivity" that Christ led away as his captives. So the "captivity" one leads captive are one's enemies who have been triumphed over. This notion is also the sense of Psalm 68:17-18 concerning the exodus, Sinai and the defeat of the pagans in the promised land.

Additionally, in the spectacle of the public parade the King receives gifts in homage (Ps 68:18,29,31) and he generously distributes the spoils of war to his own citizens (Ps 68:19). With Christ, he distributes the spoils of his war unto the Church in the form of the charismata given unto mankind, making them Chosen apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and teachers with him (Eph 4:8,11)

Here's Matthew Henry on the subject:

"As great conquerors, when they rode in their triumphal chariots, used to be attended with the most illustrious of their captives led in chains, and were wont to scatter their largesses and bounty among the soldiers and other spectators of their triumphs, so Christ, when he ascended into heaven, as a triumphant conqueror, led captivity captive. It is a phrase used in the Old Testament to signify a conquest over enemies, especially over such as formerly had led others captive; see Jdg. 5:12. Captivity is here put for captives, and signifies all our spiritual enemies, who brought us into captivity before. He conquered those who had conquered us; such as sin, the devil, and death. Indeed, he triumphed over these on the cross; but the triumph was completed at his ascension, when he became Lord over all, and had the keys of death and hades put into his hands

Before Pentecost his people were the OC Jews and not his once enemies for these gifts are etermal inheritance of the first fruits of the harvest before the Gospel even went out to the Gentile nations.

Paradoxal? maybe..
Biblical, Apostolic? Absolutely!
Long AFTER the Crucifixion and 3rd day Resurrection of Jesus, The Old Covenant was still present in the Nation and Christians were entangled in it (Heb 8:13; 2 Cor 3:6-12; Gal 4:24-25; Gal 4:1-5:5). Therefore when Hebrews 10:9 says he "removes the first so that he may establish the second" we know that neither the first had yet been removed (Heb 8:13; Gal 4:24-25; 2 Cor 3:6-12) nor had the second been fully established. AD 30-AD 70 was the transition period under which they were in a process of coming out from underneath the Law. Converts to Christ were being circumcised and asked to keep the Law of Moses at least up until the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. That council only released the gentiles from the practice Law of Moses and Paul was present at the council.

Here is the REAL Paradox of your position:

"For verily I say unto you, Until heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break 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." (Matthew 5:18-19)

Jesus CLEARLY says that UNTIL that time when Heaven and Earth passes, not even the most minute jot nor tittle shall pass from the law until all is fulfilled AND, THEREFORE, whosoever shall break one of these LEAST COMMANDS and shall teach men to do so shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

ToServe, Besides the fact that you are currently holding 2 polar opposite views (1:The Law ended at the cross & 2: Heaven and earth have not yet passed, yet according to Jesus Christ, the law would not pass until Heaven and Earth passed) this gives you a very real dilemma if you believe heaven and earth have NOT passed:

(#1) You are presently breaking even those very LEAST of the commands of the Law of Moses and are teaching others to do so -- therefore you will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven
--OR--
(#2) You are presently doing and teaching even those very least of the 600+ commands of the Law of Moses and therefore shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven

I look forward to hearing whether you are doing #1 or #2 in our day.

Which one are you doing?
 
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Paradoxal? maybe..
Biblical, Apostolic? Absolutely!
Long AFTER the Crucifixion and 3rd day Resurrection of Jesus, The Old Covenant was still present in the Nation and Christians were entangled in it (Heb 8:13; 2 Cor 3:6-12; Gal 4:24-25; Gal 4:1-5:5). Therefore when Hebrews 10:9 says he "removes the first so that he may establish the second" we know that neither the first had yet been removed (Heb 8:13; Gal 4:24-25; 2 Cor 3:6-12) nor had the second been fully established. AD 30-AD 70 was the transition period under which they were in a process of coming out from underneath the Law. Converts to Christ were being circumcised and asked to keep the Law of Moses at least up until the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. That council only released the gentiles from the practice Law of Moses and Paul was present at the council.

A priesthood is required to minister on behalf of the people within the Holy of Holies. At Ascension, there was only one priesthood and only one Holy of Holies and only one High Priest, who is Jesus Christ. The 1st Temple where the Ark of the Covenant was was only an illustration for the genuine article that was present at the time that the Hebrews writer said it was (Hebrews 9, specifically 9:25-28). The one and the only Kingly priesthood of Melchizedek which replaced the Aaronic priesthood would not be running concurrently for 40 years alongside the old Covenant Aaronic priesthood and so it important to understand that only one High Priest was ministering in the Holy of Holies and not two, thereby the legality of two Covenants existing side by side is paradoxical in that they would be counterproductive to one another, especially when Christianity was new and only starting to find its way into the world for the millenniums to come and it would not be in the best interest of God to even avail two covenants to run concurrently side by side with two priesthoods for scripture is explicitly clear about this as follows -

Hebrews 5, 7 and 8 talks about the High Priest of the New Covenant and how God by calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear because it has no legal standing and hence receives no blessings and in this respect is not used by God as a measure of obedience to him, for those who continued in it, even though it was disappearing before their very eyes as evidence of a nullified agreement. For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another which explicitly renders the OC as obsolete at the anointing of the Highest Priest Jesus Christ after the order of Melchizedek and in fulfillment to the prophecy of Isaiah 22:19-25.

Read Hebrews entirely and discern that it focuses on the New Permanent and non-transferable Kingly Priesthood of Jesus Christ our High Priest and so only one covenantal agreement can apply between God and Man as scripture explicitly states.

Hebrews 9:8-10
The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle (Solomon's Temple that had the Ark of the Covenant) was still functioning. That was only an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

Here is the REAL Paradox of your position:

"For verily I say unto you, Until heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break 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." (Matthew 5:18-19)

Jesus CLEARLY says that UNTIL that time when Heaven and Earth passes, not even the most minute jot nor tittle shall pass from the law until all is fulfilled AND, THEREFORE, whosoever shall break one of these LEAST COMMANDS and shall teach men to do so shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

ToServe, Besides the fact that you are currently holding 2 polar opposite views (1:The Law ended at the cross & 2: Heaven and earth have not yet passed, yet according to Jesus Christ, the law would not pass until Heaven and Earth passed) this gives you a very real dilemma if you believe heaven and earth have NOT passed:

(#1) You are presently breaking even those very LEAST of the commands of the Law of Moses and are teaching others to do so -- therefore you will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven
--OR--
(#2) You are presently doing and teaching even those very least of the 600+ commands of the Law of Moses and therefore shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven

I look forward to hearing whether you are doing #1 or #2 in our day.

Which one are you doing?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Here is the REAL Paradox of your position:

"For verily I say unto you, Until heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break 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." (Matthew 5:18-19)

Jesus CLEARLY says that UNTIL that time when Heaven and Earth passes, not even the most minute jot nor tittle shall pass from the law until all is fulfilled AND, THEREFORE, whosoever shall break one of these LEAST COMMANDS and shall teach men to do so shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Your inferences are implying that Jesus did not fulfill the Law and the Prophets when he said it is finished on the Cross at Calvary.

The context is being ripped here by you, where you completely remove the High Priest of Hebrews from his rightful place in the Most Holy Place by insinuating that another priesthood existed alongside of him for 40 years as it also was a vehicle of fulfilling the Law until Heaven and Earth passed away according to the Preterist 70AD position.

This type of 70AD covenantal eschatological view is denying that Christ reigned as the only High Priest, in the only Temple of God within the Holy of Holies, because allegedly two covenant agreements legally stood side by side and that God considered and honored obedience to the Law as an alternate path for 40 years to obedience in Christ and this is contradictory to when Jesus said -

Look, your house is left to you desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’ ”

ToServe, Besides the fact that you are currently holding 2 polar opposite views (1:The Law ended at the cross & 2: Heaven and earth have not yet passed, yet according to Jesus Christ, the law would not pass until Heaven and Earth passed) this gives you a very real dilemma if you believe heaven and earth have NOT passed:

(#1) You are presently breaking even those very LEAST of the commands of the Law of Moses and are teaching others to do so -- therefore you will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven
--OR--
(#2) You are presently doing and teaching even those very least of the 600+ commands of the Law of Moses and therefore shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven

I look forward to hearing whether you are doing #1 or #2 in our day.

Which one are you doing?
 
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

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
ToServe, Besides the fact that you are currently holding 2 polar opposite views (1:The Law ended at the cross & 2: Heaven and earth have not yet passed, yet according to Jesus Christ, the law would not pass until Heaven and Earth passed) this gives you a very real dilemma if you believe heaven and earth have NOT passed:

(#1) You are presently breaking even those very LEAST of the commands of the Law of Moses and are teaching others to do so -- therefore you will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven
--OR--
(#2) You are presently doing and teaching even those very least of the 600+ commands of the Law of Moses and therefore shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven

The Preterist eschatological view is that Heaven and Earth passed on 70AD with the passing of the Old Covenant as it waxed and waned for 40 years.

Heaven and Earth passing is a phrase that you are misrepresenting.

Luke 21:33 and Matthew 24:35 states that the words of Jesus will not pass away. Does that imply that his words tied to his teachings and instructions passed away after 70AD?

God forbid!

So what is the Law that Jesus was referring to in Matthew that is associated with not passing away ever, get it, ever, that is not passing away after 70AD and neither passing away when the world and all of humanity simply goes to oblivion.

Jesus Fulfills the Law

17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For 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. 19Whosoever therefore shall break 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.

Jesus came to fulfill all the Law and the Prophets so that at Pentecost Grace can be dispensed which does not account obedience as a measure of being under the Mosaic Law, but as being faithful to Christ and his words (Luke 21:33 and Matthew 24:35) of instruction that will never ever pass away even when the world comes crashing down. Jesus plainly teaches the Law immediately after stating the phrase above, by covering areas of anger and reconciliation, adultery, vows, love your enemies which is contrary to the instruction of Moses under the Law as in an eye for an eye, instruction about giving to which he summarises all these down to two Laws which is Love God and Love your neighbor.

So the question is when and how does Christ fulfill the Law where his righteousness is imputed onto our behalves?

On the Cross at Calvary when he said it is finished where he became the Cornerstone of the Temple of God and then through the Holy Spirit of Grace who came to imprint Christ's righteousness on us, where we become less us and more him in respect to his words of instruction that will never pass away, even when the world comes crashing down.

The work of Christ has nothing to do with 70AD as it is work in progress from Pentecost onwards where Christ will continue to reign in the hearts and minds of people until their full quota comes to be documented in the Book of Life and this includes you and me as a testimonial to the reign continuing to this very day where his words continue and it is essential to remember that unless Christ fulfilled the Law and the Prophets at the Cross, then he could not have become the High Priest of the New Covenant and to say that 70AD is the year the New Covenant came into its fullness is very premature and condescending to the Lord at best by denying that Christ reigned through his Cross and reigns even to this very day for it is written -

For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

The testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophesy and so the end of the Law was on the Cross as it was nailed never to be used nor applied as a measure of obedience to God and to deny this fact one denies Christ and denies the Power of his Cross. 70AD narrative denies Christ and denies the Power of his Cross by declaring that the Law was a means test to measure obedience to God and this is to tread under foot the Son of God and to insult the Spirit of Grace. (Hebrews 10:29)


I look forward to hearing whether you are doing #1 or #2 in our day.

Which one are you doing?

The Law ended at the Cross and the Words of Christ continues even to this day, even when the world comes crashing down.

70AD narrative denies Christ and denies the Power of his Cross by declaring that the Law was a means test to measure obedience to God and this is to tread under foot the Son of God and to insult the Spirit of Grace. (Hebrews 10:29)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I look forward to it.
I cited a good amount of scripture, so be sure and use the scriptures I cited and offer up why/how you believe they don't mean what I contend they do, and then offer up your alternate interpretation of them.

If you just ignore them, or simply tell me my interpretation is wrong, without offering up your alternative interpretation of what they EXPLICITLY teach, I'll be forced to conclude you have no answer for them beyond your own speculation and inference.

Done so.

Rather I cite explicit teaching, such as Hebrews 8:13
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.

This was written in the early 60's AD, and the Author EXPLICITLY teaches (no inference) that, at that time, the Old Covenant was "Becoming obsolete, Growing old and READY to Vanish".

Polar opposite of your teaching that it had already disappeared decades prior.

Also, Galatians 4 SPECIFICALLY speaks of the transition that the first believers underwent as they began moving away from the Old Covenant law bondage and into their New Covenant redemption/adoption as the manifested sons of God in liberty, by God's Spirit. As the passage shows, the Galatians were very much in transition between these two covenant systems (see Gal 4:21-31).

It took God an instant to free the Israelites from the bondage of Pharoah who symbolises the Law that condemns to death. God used Moses a symbol of Christ to lead them out of bondage. Yet the Israelites the old generation wanted no part of it as they complained that their lives were better in bondage under Pharoah/Law. They needed 40 years in the wilderness of convincing, after most of the old generation died in the desert so to be replaced by the new generation that would be more accustomed (receptive) to being free from the bondage of Pharoah and to embrace their new found freedom in the Promised Land.

Though God ratified a New Covenant through his Christ as the symbol of the serpent as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up. So the burden and bondage to the Law was removed right there and then on the Cross at Calvary when Christ said it is finished but the Jews like the ancient Israelites wanted no part of it and continued in bondage to the Law by living it to the detriment to themselves and for this God allowed them to perish to their end destruction. God who is the same God of Moses would never instruct them to go back to the Pharoah/Law. So those years were probationary in the valley of decision and not that God considered their unwillingness to let go of the Law as anything Holy to begin with, but as Daniel 9:27 explicitly states they choose to continue their abominations as did the Israelites until their very end and the end of their earthly city and unholy earthly temple.

God was not allowing the Old Covenant to wax and wane but he ended it on the Cross but the stiff neck Jews as Peter put it never wanted to let go of the Law and they would do exactly what their ancestors did by choosing death over life, Pharoah/Law over Christ/Life.

“You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit! (Acts 7:51)

Again you are reading Galatians from a different vantage point. Read it in context.

21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.23His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.

What Peter is saying is that the Law represents the son of Hagar and is born into bondage and is compared to the old covenant, hence was sent away to be replaced by the son of Sarah that represents freedom. Notice the two did not exist side by side, for the son who is in bondage to the Law was sent away and then the son of promise that was born free replaced him.

So Peter is mildly putting the question to them why are you continuing in the Old Covenant Law when you can be free today, right now and here as the sons of Sarah.

Yet you have to excise many EXPLICIT verses, such as Hebrews 8:13 & Galatians 4 above, to prop up this view.

It is also EXPLICITLY TESTIFIED in scripture that The Old Covenant practices including blood sacrifices, vows, and feasts continued right on in Israel until AD 70. (long after the Temple Veil was Rent, and REPAIRED)

AND, the early Jerusalem Church continued to observe Moses in all ways all through the book of Acts since only the gentiles were permitted to by-pass the Laws of Moses. Paul and James men kept vows and even gave blood sacrifices in Acts 21:18-26 as was their custom to be zealous for the Law (Acts 21:20).

The transition from the Old Testament world to Christ and the New Testament world was absolutely huge---the biggest event of all the bible. That transition is the main topic and context of the entire New Testament scripture. How is it that so many Christians today fail to understand that this is the context in which to read the gospels and epistles? Reading the New Testament for all its worth requires us to think as first-century Jews would have, not as 21st century Westerners. For Christ and the apostles, a brave new world in which nothing of the Temple and Mosaic Covenant/Priesthood would continue was nearly unimaginable. And yet this is the very world they prophesied and the one which appeared suddenly in their generation.

The Old Covenant consisted of the Mosaic Temple, laws, sacrifices, and Aaronic priesthood. Jesus EXPLICITLY placed its extinction at AD 70: "Not one stone shall be left on another." "When the Lord of the Vineyard comes...the kingdom shall be taken from you and given to a new nation..." "They shall lay you even with the ground." "Behold your House is being left to you desolate."

AGAIN, The Old Covenant consisted of the Mosaic Temple, laws, sacrifices, and Aaronic priesthood. Jesus EXPLICITLY placed its extinction at AD 70: "Not one stone shall be left on another." "When the Lord of the Vineyard comes...the kingdom shall be taken from you and given to a new nation..." "They shall lay you even with the ground." "Behold your House is being left to you desolate."

However. I am curious where you believe the Bible EXPLICITLY teaches your claim that "the giving of gifts is the final step to the transition from the Old to the New"
What scripture(s) do you believe explicitly teach that the giving of Gifts is the FINAL STEP and no further building or preparation of the New Covenant is necessary for it's completion, no need for gentile inclusion, no need for the Apostles to travel through Israel from city to city preaching the gospel, no need for the Gospel to be preached to all the world, no need for the Apostles to continue to be zealous for the Law and perform its duties, sacrifices and rituals, the way they did and taught their flocks to do, no need to Christ to do any work POST ascension at the Heavenly Altar, etc... where does the Bible teach that all these subsequent EXPLICIT NEW COVENANT TEACHINGS are to be ignored, rejected, or excised from the pages of Scripture, as you seem to infer?

I have provided ALL explicit teachings. I maintain that Yours is the view of infrence and speculation.

Jerusalem fell precisely BECAUSE the Old Covenant was a valid contract unto AD 70 (Matthew 5:17-18). From AD 66-70, the city of Jerusalem fell under the powerful curses outlined in Lev 26 and Deut 28! If that old covenant was no longer extant, Jerusalem wouldn't have fallen under the curses prescribed in Lev 26 and Deut 28.

I do not deny that the New Covenant was begun during Christ's earthly ministry.
However, the "last days" generation that transitioned in the New Covenant Kingdom age [i.e., AD 30-70] was a mere 40 year struggle to break from the Law bondage and curse for the People of God. The "last days" struggle for God's people ended with the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem.

The kingdom of Christ was in the process of being preached and established among the gentiles while certain of the Jewish establishment sought to stop it from happening. This 40-year struggle grew worse and then ended abruptly when the rebellious Jews were wiped out in Jerusalem. The obedient Jews (with their gentile brothers added in), in following the gospel, were protected and preserved as the only covenant people left alive. Thus Christ's New Covenant people emerged with the Kingdom while the wicked sons were cast out and killed off to extinction. There was no longer an Old Covenant nation, priesthood, people, or religion after AD 70. The Old Covenant world went up in flames. Christ's New Covenant Kingdom was all that remained.

Look closely at Heb 12:18, and you will see that the contrast is being made between the Old and New Covenant ages. The author states that God "shook the earth" to establish the Mosaic age, but now in their time he was "shaking once more," for they were receiving the New Covenant kingdom Jesus gave them (Matt 21:43/Heb 12:28/Mark 1:14-15). The Old Covenant age was at that moment (i.e., AD 64-66) waxing old and was "about to vanish away" (Heb 8:13). It did vanish away just about five years later at AD 70, for "in a very, very short while, He who was coming came and did not delay" (Heb 10:37).

According to the writer of Hebrews, God was removing the first covenant age so as to establish the second:

-COMPARE THIS--

Hebrews 12:27
And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace...

--TO THIS--

Hebrews 10:9
Then said I: Behold, I come to do thy will, O God: he taketh away the first [covenant], that he may establish the second.

--AND TO THIS--

Hebrews 8:13
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first [covenant] obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is about to disappear.

AND TO THIS--

2 Corinthians 3:6-8, 11
[God] made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? ... For if that which is fading away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.

"Is fading away" was then, EXPLICITLY, "present tense", long after the Cross.
No inference or speculation needed to accept this EXPLI

Simply put, the Old Covenant world was being removed, and the New Covenant World was being erected in its place. All that took place in the last days period of the Old Covenant age.
 
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Yet you have to excise many EXPLICIT verses, such as Hebrews 8:13 & Galatians 4 above, to prop up this view.

It is also EXPLICITLY TESTIFIED in scripture that The Old Covenant practices including blood sacrifices, vows, and feasts continued right on in Israel until AD 70. (long after the Temple Veil was Rent, and REPAIRED)

AND, the early Jerusalem Church continued to observe Moses in all ways all through the book of Acts since only the gentiles were permitted to by-pass the Laws of Moses. Paul and James men kept vows and even gave blood sacrifices in Acts 21:18-26 as was their custom to be zealous for the Law (Acts 21:20).

"The Old Covenant practices including blood sacrifices, vows, and feasts continued right on in Israel until AD 70" to attest to their disobedience, as compared to the disobedient Ancient Israelites who walked in the valley of decision (Joel 3:14) for 40 years to their own detriment. God gives them the 40 years probation to embrace his New Covenant or else, that would justify him in dispensing his judgement in 70AD upon the already desolate priesthood of the temple of doom.

Never did God consider their sacrifices or temple as Holy and in agreement/covenant with him at the detriment of his Son's blood covenant.

Scripture explicitly informs us of the following -

Jesus shall cause the Old Covenant sacrifice and the oblation to cease being a means for atonement by his one time sacrifice as our High Priest, and for the overspreading of the Old Covenant abominations that continued onto 70AD Jesus shall make it desolate and to no avail, even until the consummation when they no longer are practised, and the judgment determined after the 40 years probation shall be poured upon the already desolate and unholy priesthood and unholy temple in 70AD (Daniel 9:27)

When Jesus said look right NOW for your house is left onto you desolate and then he left them standing, this Word is the Word of God executed right there and then.

Look, your house is left to you desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. (Matthew 23:38-39)

The transition from the Old Testament world to Christ and the New Testament world was absolutely huge---the biggest event of all the bible. That transition is the main topic and context of the entire New Testament scripture. How is it that so many Christians today fail to understand that this is the context in which to read the gospels and epistles? Reading the New Testament for all its worth requires us to think as first-century Jews would have, not as 21st century Westerners. For Christ and the apostles, a brave new world in which nothing of the Temple and Mosaic Covenant/Priesthood would continue was nearly unimaginable. And yet this is the very world they prophesied and the one which appeared suddenly in their generation.

The Old Covenant consisted of the Mosaic Temple, laws, sacrifices, and Aaronic priesthood. Jesus EXPLICITLY placed its extinction at AD 70: "Not one stone shall be left on another." "When the Lord of the Vineyard comes...the kingdom shall be taken from you and given to a new nation..." "They shall lay you even with the ground." "Behold your House is being left to you desolate."

AGAIN, The Old Covenant consisted of the Mosaic Temple, laws, sacrifices, and Aaronic priesthood. Jesus EXPLICITLY placed its extinction at AD 70: "Not one stone shall be left on another." "When the Lord of the Vineyard comes...the kingdom shall be taken from you and given to a new nation..." "They shall lay you even with the ground." "Behold your House is being left to you desolate."

However. I am curious where you believe the Bible EXPLICITLY teaches your claim that "the giving of gifts is the final step to the transition from the Old to the New"
What scripture(s) do you believe explicitly teach that the giving of Gifts is the FINAL STEP and no further building or preparation of the New Covenant is necessary for it's completion, no need for gentile inclusion, no need for the Apostles to travel through Israel from city to city preaching the gospel, no need for the Gospel to be preached to all the world, no need for the Apostles to continue to be zealous for the Law and perform its duties, sacrifices and rituals, the way they did and taught their flocks to do, no need to Christ to do any work POST ascension at the Heavenly Altar, etc... where does the Bible teach that all these subsequent EXPLICIT NEW COVENANT TEACHINGS are to be ignored, rejected, or excised from the pages of Scripture, as you seem to infer?

I have provided ALL explicit teachings. I maintain that Yours is the view of infrence and speculation.

Jerusalem fell precisely BECAUSE the Old Covenant was a valid contract unto AD 70 (Matthew 5:17-18). From AD 66-70, the city of Jerusalem fell under the powerful curses outlined in Lev 26 and Deut 28! If that old covenant was no longer extant, Jerusalem wouldn't have fallen under the curses prescribed in Lev 26 and Deut 28.

I do not deny that the New Covenant was begun during Christ's earthly ministry.
However, the "last days" generation that transitioned in the New Covenant Kingdom age [i.e., AD 30-70] was a mere 40 year struggle to break from the Law bondage and curse for the People of God. The "last days" struggle for God's people ended with the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem.

The kingdom of Christ was in the process of being preached and established among the gentiles while certain of the Jewish establishment sought to stop it from happening. This 40-year struggle grew worse and then ended abruptly when the rebellious Jews were wiped out in Jerusalem. The obedient Jews (with their gentile brothers added in), in following the gospel, were protected and preserved as the only covenant people left alive. Thus Christ's New Covenant people emerged with the Kingdom while the wicked sons were cast out and killed off to extinction. There was no longer an Old Covenant nation, priesthood, people, or religion after AD 70. The Old Covenant world went up in flames. Christ's New Covenant Kingdom was all that remained.

Look closely at Heb 12:18, and you will see that the contrast is being made between the Old and New Covenant ages. The author states that God "shook the earth" to establish the Mosaic age, but now in their time he was "shaking once more," for they were receiving the New Covenant kingdom Jesus gave them (Matt 21:43/Heb 12:28/Mark 1:14-15). The Old Covenant age was at that moment (i.e., AD 64-66) waxing old and was "about to vanish away" (Heb 8:13). It did vanish away just about five years later at AD 70, for "in a very, very short while, He who was coming came and did not delay" (Heb 10:37).

According to the writer of Hebrews, God was removing the first covenant age so as to establish the second:

-COMPARE THIS--

Hebrews 12:27
And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace...

--TO THIS--

Hebrews 10:9
Then said I: Behold, I come to do thy will, O God: he taketh away the first [covenant], that he may establish the second.

--AND TO THIS--

Hebrews 8:13
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first [covenant] obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is about to disappear.

AND TO THIS--

2 Corinthians 3:6-8, 11
[God] made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? ... For if that which is fading away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.

"Is fading away" was then, EXPLICITLY, "present tense", long after the Cross.
No inference or speculation needed to accept this EXPLI

Simply put, the Old Covenant world was being removed, and the New Covenant World was being erected in its place. All that took place in the last days period of the Old Covenant age.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The transition from the Old Testament world to Christ and the New Testament world was absolutely huge---the biggest event of all the bible. That transition is the main topic and context of the entire New Testament scripture. How is it that so many Christians today fail to understand that this is the context in which to read the gospels and epistles? Reading the New Testament for all its worth requires us to think as first-century Jews would have, not as 21st century Westerners. For Christ and the apostles, a brave new world in which nothing of the Temple and Mosaic Covenant/Priesthood would continue was nearly unimaginable. And yet this is the very world they prophesied and the one which appeared suddenly in their generation.

The transition from the Old Testament world to Christ and the New Testament world was absolutely huge---the biggest event of all the bible, that is why it is absent from all Apostolic writings, who would have certainly explicitly mentioning it. But no, the importance of that temple is purposely not documented, just like the absence of the Ark of the Covenant does not get mentioned after the 1st Temple was destroyed. Do you see the importance of why the Old Testament writers are silent on the Ark after the destruction of the 1st Temple? and why the New Testament writers are silent on the destruction of the unholy abominations temple ? Something to ponder upon indeed!

The 70AD transition from Old to New is the main topic and context of the entire New Testament scripture, that is why it does not get a mention.

If we think of the Covenant of God as the 1st century Judaizers thought of it then we are no different to the disobedient and in bondage sons of Hagar who cleave to the covenant of death, all the while throughout the 40 years probationary whilst freedom was instituted and offered through the Son of Promise Jesus Christ.

How could God offer freedom through his Son whilst still legally honouring the covenant of death embraced by the sons who wanted to stay in bondage? it would seem counter intuitive to even think that God is offering freedom on one hand whilst allowing an agreement of bondage on the other hand that is counterproductive to the whole intended purpose of God so loving the world that he wanted to free them through his Son.

When God makes something New he does not drag along with it for 40 years an Old contract because it is not how God does things. Just like Jesus said you do not put New Wine into an Old wine skin and this explicitly reveals that God fulfills and does away with the 1st agreement in order to replace it with the New.

Tell me how two legal documents can be legally valid if one contradicts the other?

Whenever a legal document is drafted the previous is nullified as a legally standing documented.

To think that God had two open contracts from Christ's Cross to 70AD is belony and it begs belief.

The Old Covenant consisted of the Mosaic Temple, laws, sacrifices, and Aaronic priesthood. Jesus EXPLICITLY placed its extinction at AD 70: "Not one stone shall be left on another." "When the Lord of the Vineyard comes...the kingdom shall be taken from you and given to a new nation..." "They shall lay you even with the ground." "Behold your House is being left to you desolate."

AGAIN, The Old Covenant consisted of the Mosaic Temple, laws, sacrifices, and Aaronic priesthood. Jesus EXPLICITLY placed its extinction at AD 70: "Not one stone shall be left on another." "When the Lord of the Vineyard comes...the kingdom shall be taken from you and given to a new nation..." "They shall lay you even with the ground." "Behold your House is being left to you desolate."

However. I am curious where you believe the Bible EXPLICITLY teaches your claim that "the giving of gifts is the final step to the transition from the Old to the New"
What scripture(s) do you believe explicitly teach that the giving of Gifts is the FINAL STEP and no further building or preparation of the New Covenant is necessary for it's completion, no need for gentile inclusion, no need for the Apostles to travel through Israel from city to city preaching the gospel, no need for the Gospel to be preached to all the world, no need for the Apostles to continue to be zealous for the Law and perform its duties, sacrifices and rituals, the way they did and taught their flocks to do, no need to Christ to do any work POST ascension at the Heavenly Altar, etc... where does the Bible teach that all these subsequent EXPLICIT NEW COVENANT TEACHINGS are to be ignored, rejected, or excised from the pages of Scripture, as you seem to infer?

I have provided ALL explicit teachings. I maintain that Yours is the view of infrence and speculation.

Jerusalem fell precisely BECAUSE the Old Covenant was a valid contract unto AD 70 (Matthew 5:17-18). From AD 66-70, the city of Jerusalem fell under the powerful curses outlined in Lev 26 and Deut 28! If that old covenant was no longer extant, Jerusalem wouldn't have fallen under the curses prescribed in Lev 26 and Deut 28.

I do not deny that the New Covenant was begun during Christ's earthly ministry.
However, the "last days" generation that transitioned in the New Covenant Kingdom age [i.e., AD 30-70] was a mere 40 year struggle to break from the Law bondage and curse for the People of God. The "last days" struggle for God's people ended with the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem.

The kingdom of Christ was in the process of being preached and established among the gentiles while certain of the Jewish establishment sought to stop it from happening. This 40-year struggle grew worse and then ended abruptly when the rebellious Jews were wiped out in Jerusalem. The obedient Jews (with their gentile brothers added in), in following the gospel, were protected and preserved as the only covenant people left alive. Thus Christ's New Covenant people emerged with the Kingdom while the wicked sons were cast out and killed off to extinction. There was no longer an Old Covenant nation, priesthood, people, or religion after AD 70. The Old Covenant world went up in flames. Christ's New Covenant Kingdom was all that remained.

Look closely at Heb 12:18, and you will see that the contrast is being made between the Old and New Covenant ages. The author states that God "shook the earth" to establish the Mosaic age, but now in their time he was "shaking once more," for they were receiving the New Covenant kingdom Jesus gave them (Matt 21:43/Heb 12:28/Mark 1:14-15). The Old Covenant age was at that moment (i.e., AD 64-66) waxing old and was "about to vanish away" (Heb 8:13). It did vanish away just about five years later at AD 70, for "in a very, very short while, He who was coming came and did not delay" (Heb 10:37).

According to the writer of Hebrews, God was removing the first covenant age so as to establish the second:

-COMPARE THIS--

Hebrews 12:27
And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace...

--TO THIS--

Hebrews 10:9
Then said I: Behold, I come to do thy will, O God: he taketh away the first [covenant], that he may establish the second.

--AND TO THIS--

Hebrews 8:13
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first [covenant] obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is about to disappear.

AND TO THIS--

2 Corinthians 3:6-8, 11
[God] made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? ... For if that which is fading away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.

"Is fading away" was then, EXPLICITLY, "present tense", long after the Cross.
No inference or speculation needed to accept this EXPLI

Simply put, the Old Covenant world was being removed, and the New Covenant World was being erected in its place. All that took place in the last days period of the Old Covenant age.
 
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

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The Old Covenant consisted of the Mosaic Temple, laws, sacrifices, and Aaronic priesthood. Jesus EXPLICITLY placed its extinction at AD 70: "Not one stone shall be left on another." "When the Lord of the Vineyard comes...the kingdom shall be taken from you and given to a new nation..." "They shall lay you even with the ground." "Behold your House is being left to you desolate."

Jesus is referencing the Cornerstone when it was laid. The Cornerstone was laid 40 years before 70AD. So if this stone is the stone that breaks and grinds to powder those who oppose it and fall on it, then judgement us happening when the stone was laid in the firm place. Jesus uses a hyperbole of a parable of the Lord of the Vineyard coming with refetence to the stone that condemns those who reject and who oppose it and this is happening ever since it was laid as the foundation of God's house/Temple.

AGAIN, The Old Covenant consisted of the Mosaic Temple, laws, sacrifices, and Aaronic priesthood. Jesus EXPLICITLY placed its extinction at AD 70: "Not one stone shall be left on another." "When the Lord of the Vineyard comes...the kingdom shall be taken from you and given to a new nation..." "They shall lay you even with the ground." "Behold your House is being left to you desolate."

However. I am curious where you believe the Bible EXPLICITLY teaches your claim that "the giving of gifts is the final step to the transition from the Old to the New"
What scripture(s) do you believe explicitly teach that the giving of Gifts is the FINAL STEP and no further building or preparation of the New Covenant is necessary for it's completion, no need for gentile inclusion, no need for the Apostles to travel through Israel from city to city preaching the gospel, no need for the Gospel to be preached to all the world, no need for the Apostles to continue to be zealous for the Law and perform its duties, sacrifices and rituals, the way they did and taught their flocks to do, no need to Christ to do any work POST ascension at the Heavenly Altar, etc... where does the Bible teach that all these subsequent EXPLICIT NEW COVENANT TEACHINGS are to be ignored, rejected, or excised from the pages of Scripture, as you seem to infer?

Because the reference of giving gifts is before Christ's resurrection to those Old Covenant firstfruits (144,000) who were waiting for the Messiah to give tgem theur eternal inheritance as Daniel was told to rest and on that day he will awake to receive what is due for him. (Daniel 12)

I have provided ALL explicit teachings. I maintain that Yours is the view of infrence and speculation.

Jerusalem fell precisely BECAUSE the Old Covenant was a valid contract unto AD 70 (Matthew 5:17-18). From AD 66-70, the city of Jerusalem fell under the powerful curses outlined in Lev 26 and Deut 28! If that old covenant was no longer extant, Jerusalem wouldn't have fallen under the curses prescribed in Lev 26 and Deut 28.

I do not deny that the New Covenant was begun during Christ's earthly ministry.
However, the "last days" generation that transitioned in the New Covenant Kingdom age [i.e., AD 30-70] was a mere 40 year struggle to break from the Law bondage and curse for the People of God. The "last days" struggle for God's people ended with the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem.

The kingdom of Christ was in the process of being preached and established among the gentiles while certain of the Jewish establishment sought to stop it from happening. This 40-year struggle grew worse and then ended abruptly when the rebellious Jews were wiped out in Jerusalem. The obedient Jews (with their gentile brothers added in), in following the gospel, were protected and preserved as the only covenant people left alive. Thus Christ's New Covenant people emerged with the Kingdom while the wicked sons were cast out and killed off to extinction. There was no longer an Old Covenant nation, priesthood, people, or religion after AD 70. The Old Covenant world went up in flames. Christ's New Covenant Kingdom was all that remained.

They were under a 40 year probation, not under a 40 year transition/renovation for the hand of God was already condemning them just as the unfaithful Israelites were being condemned in the 40 year exodus. The stone condemned them ever since it was laid as the sure foundation.

Look closely at Heb 12:18, and you will see that the contrast is being made between the Old and New Covenant ages. The author states that God "shook the earth" to establish the Mosaic age, but now in their time he was "shaking once more," for they were receiving the New Covenant kingdom Jesus gave them (Matt 21:43/Heb 12:28/Mark 1:14-15). The Old Covenant age was at that moment (i.e., AD 64-66) waxing old and was "about to vanish away" (Heb 8:13). It did vanish away just about five years later at AD 70, for "in a very, very short while, He who was coming came and did not delay" (Heb 10:37).

According to the writer of Hebrews, God was removing the first covenant age so as to establish the second:

-COMPARE THIS--

Hebrews 12:27
And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace...

--TO THIS--

Hebrews 10:9
Then said I: Behold, I come to do thy will, O God: he taketh away the first [covenant], that he may establish the second.

--AND TO THIS--

Hebrews 8:13
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first [covenant] obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is about to disappear.

AND TO THIS--

2 Corinthians 3:6-8, 11
[God] made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? ... For if that which is fading away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.

"Is fading away" was then, EXPLICITLY, "present tense", long after the Cross.
No inference or speculation needed to accept this EXPLI

Simply put, the Old Covenant world was being removed, and the New Covenant World was being erected in its place. All that took place in the last days period of the Old Covenant age.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ToServe

Active Member
Sep 18, 2018
372
90
49
Sydney
✟29,108.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Look closely at Heb 12:18, and you will see that the contrast is being made between the Old and New Covenant ages. The author states that God "shook the earth" to establish the Mosaic age, but now in their time he was "shaking once more," for they were receiving the New Covenant kingdom Jesus gave them (Matt 21:43/Heb 12:28/Mark 1:14-15). The Old Covenant age was at that moment (i.e., AD 64-66) waxing old and was "about to vanish away" (Heb 8:13). It did vanish away just about five years later at AD 70, for "in a very, very short while, He who was coming came and did not delay" (Heb 10:37).

According to the writer of Hebrews, God was removing the first covenant age so as to establish the second:

Legal framework cannot have two diametrically opposite agreements running concurrently.

-COMPARE THIS--

Hebrews 12:27
And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace...

--TO THIS--

Hebrews 10:9
Then said I: Behold, I come to do thy will, O God: he taketh away the first [covenant], that he may establish the second.

--AND TO THIS--

Hebrews 8:13
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first [covenant] obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is about to disappear.

The Zealots found that out the hard way as the rude shock was that God was never in agreement with them and their covenant with death for God is the God of the living.

AND TO THIS--

2 Corinthians 3:6-8, 11
[God] made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory? ... For if that which is fading away was with glory, much more that which remains is in glory.

"Is fading away" was then, EXPLICITLY, "present tense", long after the Cross.
No inference or speculation needed to accept this EXPLI

70AD compared to Ascension, what event is more important to God for him to annul the covenant with death?

Simply put, the Old Covenant world was being removed, and the New Covenant World was being erected in its place. All that took place in the last days period of the Old Covenant age.

There was not a removation and demolition happening across 40 years at the same time.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟794,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You mean OC fading out as in God still considered those who are under the Law as faithful servants right?

So Paul and James were wrong in your view to be zealous for the Law after the cross?

If not faithful servants then what?

Unfaithful servants BOUND by the curse of the Covenant.
If as you say the covenant was no longer extant, then those unfaithful servants were not bound to it's curses.

Surely, when Jesus said it is finished then he who is the Messiah whom the Old Testament prophets said would come and be as the firgure of Moses called The Servant in Deuteronomy 18:15-19 ended the OC agreement right there and then.
What was that agreement? "Do X or else..."

If they did not do X, then the OR else still applies... you would have it that the "or else" no longer applied.

Untenable.

Did God as the second party to the OC continue in agreement with those who refused to listen and to come to Jesus?

absolutely. He continued with the "or else" clause of the agreement.


It would be credulous to even think that God is honoring those who are under the Law, for the OC agreement after the Cross no longer stood and was ripped up and the Blood Covenant of His Son triumphed over the nullified OC agreement. It is finished said Jesus.

You misread Hebrews 8:13 because it clearly stating that the OC is made obsolete by the New Covenant and an obsolete agreement has no legal standing as far as being continued by the desolate priestly house after the sign of Jonah was given them.

"Or else" still was in effect.

The Hebrews writer is saying what is no longer an agreement between two parties who is God and OC Jews as an effect will eventually dissipate because God has pulled out from it and so for this cause the effect is desolation.

We seem to agree.

You have moved your goalposts from Extinguished at the cross to "will eventually dissipate after the cross".

we are making progress!

Daniel 9:27 states that Jesus shall cause the OC sacrifices to cease, resulting as an effect to those practices being desolate even when they are ended before 70AD and on top of that the judgement determined (70AD) is eventually poured upon the already desolated priestly house after the Cross of Christ .

Again, you seem to agree here that the 70Ad judgment was a judgment determined and poured out per the OC contract. again we agree.
 
Last edited:
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

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟794,018.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
They were under a 40 year probation, not under a 40 year transition/renovation for the hand of God was already condemning them just as the unfaithful Israelites were being condemned in the 40 year exodus. The stone condemned them ever since it was laid as the sure foundation.

Semantics.

We seem to agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToServe
Upvote 0