What people believe does not change the truth...

[Soon144k]

I agree with you that -- the more a person thinks he knows -- the less he feels the need for faith. However, we differ in that I don't see this as a desirable thing. In my mind, there is a difference between (i) searching for understanding and (ii) believing you alone are closing in on "the truth."

BFA

Make no mistake: I believe that all of us start the process of sanctification by faith. But faith is not the end point, it is only the beginning. In both Hebrew and Greek the word translated as 'faith' actually has more of a connection to 'trust'. Jesus did not have 'faith' that His Father was God, but He did have complete trust that this was so. By faith you can believe ANYTHING, even things that are wrong. But Trust is never built on lies and takes a lot longer to accomplish than merely believing something by 'faith', which can happen in an instant.

It may be that because the early translators were so fixated on the 'righteousness by faith' description of salvation in the writings of Paul that 'faith' became the catch-all and substitute for the word 'trust'. I don't know. What I do know is that becoming educated in any subject area leads to trust in that knowledge and brings understanding that leads to wisdom. No one have ever gained wisdom by faith.

 

[VictorC]

Many more sins followed these, everyone of them were transgressions of the one or more of the ten commandments as they were later written down.

You know perfectly well that this is impossible, as transgressions don't exist without a commandment to violate. You admitted that the Ten Commandments didn't exist at the time sin violated the precepts that are partially codified on the covenant from Mount Sinai, consistent with Scripture's testimony that sin existed long before the law did.

VictorC posted a scripture showing the Pharaoh knew it was wrong to lie.

I don't remember doing that, but Pharaoh wasn't alone - Cain also sinned, and never received the penalty that the law would contain when it was codified. Sin is not imputed where there is no transgression to a law.

The penalty for sin has always been death. The penalty also has not and cannot change. We are all doomed, condemned by a law we cannot in ourselves keep.

As Romans 5:12-14 reminds us, the entrance of sin came by a transgression of the commandment contained in Genesis 2:17, "of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat". Find that commandment in the law mediated through Moses, and you will come away empty handed - no such commandment exists in the law. That is where death originated in mankind, and not by transgression to the law that Adam never knew anything about.

It is for this reason Christ came to die for us. To pay the price that we may live.

That isn't quite a complete explanation, when you dismiss the reason Christ's death introduced the new covenant that redeemed us from the covenant from Mount Sinai, as shown in Hebrews 9:15.

And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.​

 

[Soon144k]

VictorC said, "That isn't quite a complete explanation, when you dismiss the reason Christ's death introduced the new covenant that redeemed us from the covenant from Mount Sinai, as shown in Hebrews 9:15."

The death of Jesus Christ on the cross DID NOT introduce a 'new' covenant that was to redeem us from an 'old' covenant of sin and death. As you pointed out you ONLY find this in the writings of Paul. You do not find this in the writings of either the eyewitness disciples of Jesus Christ OR in the Old Testament.

You will cite the chapter and verse in Luke that says that Jesus talked about a 'NEW' covenant in His blood (Luke 22:20). The problem with this is that JESUS NEVER SAID THIS. It is confirmed that He never said this by what His eyewitness disciples quote Him as saying at the Last Supper:

And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. Matt.26:27-28.

And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. Mark 14:24.

Both Matthew and Peter were eyewitnesses to this event and neither of them have Jesus saying anything about a 'new' covenant.

Luke did not get his information about the Last Supper from any of the disciples of Jesus, because if he had he would not have used the word 'new' in conjunction with the word 'covenant'. Luke got this information from his mentor Paul, who had a vested interest in CHANGING THE GOSPEL to fit his own requirements, which were to destroy the 'old' covenant, the 10 Commandments, and replace it with a 'new' covenant where the Law is done away with, so where there is not law there is no violation (Rom.4:15). Doing this make sin of NONE EFFECT, so that sin does not affect whether or not someone is saved.

JESUS NEVER TAUGHT ANY OF THIS, and there is no possible way for you to prove that He did by using only His words as He gave them to His own eyewitness disciples, or by using anything from the Old Testament.

So when you make the claim that gospel was modified to reflect these changes you are calling God a liar, and that is blaspheme. Paul was a liar and a blasphemer. If you continue to believe what he wrote then you will be held accountable with him in the judgement for that belief. This is part of the belief of the 5 Foolish Bridesmaids of Matt.25:1-13 and they were shut out of the marriage supper. They believed that the law no longer mattered, that they were saved only by grace through faith, and look what happened to them. That story is a prophecy about the end of time. For heaven's sake don't be a Foolish Bridesmaid and believe this lie as if it is the truth. If you do then you, like them, will be shut out of the marriage supper of the Lamb, and that would be a real tragedy.

 

[Pythons]

Where on earth did you get the idea that I believe in anything Ellen White taught?

If your faith icon is an accurate reflection of your denomination....
...A 31 A.D. cross is required.

It's possible that you are "Adventist" ( not a seventh day variety )...
...Such as a Christadelphian, JW or WWCOG.
...I believe they teach a 30 C.E. Cross.
...On a Wed.
...Am I right?

My understanding is that Jesus was crucified in 30 CE, which is the Wednesday year of the final week of years of the 490 year prophecy in Dan. 9:24, which ended in 33 CE. According to my calculations Jesus was crucified ON Passover which was a Wednesday in that year, and was resurrected on Sabbath just before sunset exactly 3 nights and 3 days later. This in no way agrees with what EGW taught.

I will have to check my calendar software this evening to see if Passover in 30 CE....
...Would have incorporated a Gregorian Wed.

Officially, the SDA Church ( along with Ellen White ) did teach ( & still does ) that Jesus...
...Died on "the day of preporation" ( day prior to the seventh day sabbath ).
...And that it took place in 31 C.E.

The 1844 I.J. teaching of Seventh-day Adventists requires a 31 A.D. date for the Cross...
...And one minute at a calendation site or via software.
...Confirms a 31 A.D. Passover did not include a Gregorian Friday or Saturday.

 

[Joe67]

No one have ever gained wisdom by faith.

Soon,

Wisdom comes at the Voice of the Lord.

Faith comes at the Voice of the Lord.

Wisdom occurs in our hearts and minds when the two opposing qualities of fear and faith blend together by the work of God in his Voice.

Ps 111:10
10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: a good understanding have all they that do his commandments: his praise endureth for ever. KJV

Joe

 

[Byfaithalone1]

becoming educated in any subject area leads to trust in that knowledge and brings understanding that leads to wisdom.

If I must trust in my own knowledge in order to have wisdom, then I will never have wisdom.

No one have ever gained wisdom by faith.

All of us -- Jew, Gentile, believer, non-believer, Christian, non-Christian, Catholic, Protestant -- All of us are alike in this one point:

Everything we believe, we believe because we have faith that it is true.
​

BFA

 

[VictorC]

VictorC said, "That isn't quite a complete explanation, when you dismiss the reason Christ's death introduced the new covenant that redeemed us from the covenant from Mount Sinai, as shown in Hebrews 9:15."

The death of Jesus Christ on the cross DID NOT introduce a 'new' covenant that was to redeem us from an 'old' covenant of sin and death. As you pointed out you ONLY find this in the writings of Paul. You do not find this in the writings of either the eyewitness disciples of Jesus Christ OR in the Old Testament.

There isn't a common ground that permits discussion when you choose to discard Scripture as you have, and your previous posts have shown that you disregard the accounts that Matthew wrote, that Jeremiah wrote, and the author of Hebrews wrote. Adding the Pauline epistles and Luke's account to the list of texts you regard as uninspired doesn't help your opinion. Your previous testimony has been that there were no covenant beyond the everlasting covenant of circumcision made with the descendants of Abraham. According to you, there was no covenant made at Mount Sinai, and you don't have a narrative describing redemption from sin and death on which to call on.

We know better, which is why you have lost credibility among the members here.

 

[Soon144k]

There isn't a common ground that permits discussion when you choose to discard Scripture as you have, and your previous posts have shown that you disregard the accounts that Matthew wrote, that Jeremiah wrote, and the author of Hebrews wrote. Adding the Pauline epistles and Luke's account to the list of texts you regard as uninspired doesn't help your opinion. Your previous testimony has been that there were no covenant beyond the everlasting covenant of circumcision made with the descendants of Abraham. According to you, there was no covenant made at Mount Sinai, and you don't have a narrative describing redemption from sin and death on which to call on.

We know better, which is why you have lost credibility among the members here.

What you believe about my credibility among members on this or any other forum means little to me, because it is not by credibility that is in question; I have none and seek none. What I want is answers to questions pertaining to how salvation really works. I questions and comments based on them have provoked any number of responses, all of which I have read with an honest effort to understand. It is evident that you get little out of what I have asked and answered because you continually and deliberately misrepresent what I have said.

By example, you just made the statement that the covenant that I have been talking about is the covenant of circumcision that God gave Abraham. That has never been the case, and I have never mentioned that particular covenant either by statement or by Scriptural inference. The covenant that I have mentioned is the Covenant that God gave His Kingdom as Sinai, ie, the 10 Commandments. How this could be misinterpreted is beyond me.

I have stated repeatedly that my primary sources are the Old Testament and the words and teachings of Jesus Christ in the New Testament. I have neither said nor implied anything that could be construed as counter to that, except by someone that has a specific agenda in discrediting everything I say.

You should not feel that you need to do battle with me as I am merely a searcher for truth, as are you. I am no threat to you or anyone else on this forum as I have no particular authority granted by any recognized institution which would command respect for my positions. I view doctrine and theology differently than do you only because my method of study is different than is yours.

My comments and interpretations have sparked some healthy and stimulating discussion, and that is a good thing under any circumstances. I truly hope this can continue.

 

[VictorC]

What you believe about my credibility among members on this or any other forum means little to me, because it is not by credibility that is in question; I have none and seek none.

It would seem that you have your wish; you have been estranged by the members of the church identified by the logo next to your posting name.

What I want is answers to questions pertaining to how salvation really works.

The rendition of salvation you have appealed to isn't salvation at all; it remains a duty for you to comply with the law that started with a covenant of circumcision through Abraham and was imported into the law mediated by Moses.

I questions and comments based on them have provoked any number of responses, all of which I have read with an honest effort to understand. It is evident that you get little out of what I have asked and answered because you continually and deliberately misrepresent what I have said.

At some point in time you should accept that people are going to identify the inconsistencies you have presented. Among these is a denial that prophecy will ever be fulfilled, because of the preclusion you forced onto the testimony Jesus provided to Matthew concerning the fulfillment of the law. You also denied his record of Jesus teaching Peter that the children of God are free. Your disposition against Paul nullifies Peter, which in turn nullifies Matthew, and your conclusion comes to rejection of the entire New Testament.

By example, you just made the statement that the covenant that I have been talking about is the covenant of circumcision that God gave Abraham. That has never been the case, and I have never mentioned that particular covenant either by statement or by Scriptural inference. The covenant that I have mentioned is the Covenant that God gave His Kingdom as Sinai, ie, the 10 Commandments. How this could be misinterpreted is beyond me.

That came from claiming adherence to a covenant that was eternal, and that language applies only to the covenant mediated through Abraham. You also stated that there is no old covenant nor a new covenant, indicating a rejection of the covenant from Mount Sinai, which Moses identified by proper noun as the Ten Commandments.

I have stated repeatedly that my primary sources are the Old Testament and the words and teachings of Jesus Christ in the New Testament. I have neither said nor implied anything that could be construed as counter to that, except by someone that has a specific agenda in discrediting everything I say.

And yet you claim to have discredited Jeremiah's prophecy of a new covenant, and Jesus claiming that testimony contained in the law and in prophecy would never be fulfilled. Matthew's description of the Great Commission shows Jesus instructing His disciples to go into all the nations with the Gospel, an instruction forbidden in the law that estranged the Gentiles by the exclusive nature of its limited jurisdiction and tenure.

You should not feel that you need to do battle with me as I am merely a searcher for truth, as are you. I am no threat to you or anyone else on this forum as I have no particular authority granted by any recognized institution which would command respect for my positions. I view doctrine and theology differently than do you only because my method of study is different than is yours.

My comments and interpretations have sparked some healthy and stimulating discussion, and that is a good thing under any circumstances. I truly hope this can continue.

You chose to interject your comments in a response to Alawishis, who has also opined a strong rejection of the nonsense you brought to the table. Neither one of us are willing to reject the entire body of Scripture as you have chosen to. Instead of seeing the harmony of the epistles describing the Gospel with insight gleaned from the law mediated by Moses with what Jesus testified, you chose to misidentify which covenant was in affect germane to quotes you have lifted from Scripture. Naturally incompatible covenants aren't going to show compliance one with another, but because of a motive to reject a new covenant you didn't perform this basic exercise of reconciliation of your beliefs with Scripture. Instead, you placed yourself in an authority greater than Scripture and judged it as unworthy.

Our purpose here is to learn the Gospel described in Scripture, not discard them and hope that circumcision will earn our way into God's acceptance. I have joined others in concluding that isn't your intent on this forum.

 

[Soon144k]

My responses will be limited to on issue at a time as it becomes somewhat tedious to address so many issues at one time. However, the following is an extensive explanation, so be patient.

Most Christians believe that all prophecy applies to all people for all time. You cite Jeremiah 31:31 as an example of this, and then say that I propose that ALL prophecy will not be fulfilled because I suggested that THIS prophecy would not be fulfilled due to Israel's failure to finish the work God called them to do. However, God told Daniel that any unfulfilled prophecy would be sealed up until the time of the end (Dan.12:9). Prophecy becomes sealed when it either does not apply to a situation or the time for the prophecy's fulfillment is past. Prophecy does have a proper time for fulfillment. If that time comes and goes without the prophecy being fulfilled then that particular prophecy will never be fulfilled. Such is the case for the prophecies in Jer.31:31 and Dan. 9:24.

Please note who the prophecy of Jer.31:31 is addressed to: the house of Israel AND the house of Judah. At the time Jeremiah was given this particular prophecy the southern kingdom of Judah was in residence in Palestine (today's location) and the northern kingdom of Israel was no longer in existence, having been taken into captivity and disbursed. A little later Babylon took Judah into captivity. This Covenant was going to be 'renewed' with both houses of Israel as it had been in the days of Israel at Sinai and before either kingdom was taken captive. The word in Hebrew is Strongs 2318 - chadash, meaning causatively to renew. God is telling Jeremiah that He is planning on renewing the Covenant that He gave His kingdom at Sinai with both the houses of Israel and Judah, and that renewal would take place in the hearts and minds of the people of BOTH the southern and northern kingdoms when they rejoined to form a unified Israel again. It would not be on tables of Stone as before. This indicates a change of location for the same Covenant, NOT a completely different Covenant than was previously given. This would only have occurred had Israel completed the task for which God had re-established them when He would bring them out of captivity in Babylon. See Dan. 9:24. Israel did not fulfill their role in finishing the requirements of this prophecy, therefore God did not re-establish BOTH Judah and Israel as ONE nation, and therefore God did not, and will never, re-establish or renew the Covenant with the descendants of Israel. Neither the prophecy of Dan. 9:24 or of Jer. 31:31 will be fulfilled because Israel rejected their King and put Him on a cross. In 33 CE at the end of the 490 years of Dan. 9:24 the status of Kingdom of Heaven was removed from Israel, making any prophecies concerning Israel and their role in the time of the end moot and of none effect.

Israel as God's Kingdom no longer exists and therefore any prophecies that have not already been fulfilled will never be fulfilled for Israel, including the so called 'new covenant' that Paul bases his entire salvation theology on.

But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Jer.31:33.

This verse says that the Covenant God will make with Israel would be AFTER THOSE DAYS. After what days? After the days when both Israel and Judah would be brought back together from captivity. This NEVER happened. And what was that covenant? God says that is was "MY LAW" that He would write on their hearts. Then, and only then, would He be their God and they would be His people.

THIS DID NOT HAPPEN, AND NEVER WILL HAPPEN because the time for the fulfillment of this prophecy is long past.

This Covenant is a LAWful covenant based on the 10 Commandments. Anyone that claims that the 'new covenant' is a covenant without LAW does not understand that God does not change something that He has already established.

 

[VictorC]

My responses will be limited to on issue at a time as it becomes somewhat tedious to address so many issues at one time. However, the following is an extensive explanation, so be patient.

Most Christians believe that all prophecy applies to all people for all time. You cite Jeremiah 31:31 as an example of this, and then say that I propose that ALL prophecy will not be fulfilled because I suggested that THIS prophecy would not be fulfilled due to Israel's failure to finish the work God called them to do.

I don't think your description of what most Christians believe is either accurate nor germane to what Jeremiah prophesied. It was Jesus Who equated prophecy with the law, and determined that both would be fulfilled in their totality, leaving nothing concerning Him unfulfilled. He made no statement introducing a litmus test of God's performance based on what fallen humans weren't able to do.

However, God told Daniel that any unfulfilled prophecy would be sealed up until the time of the end (Dan.12:9).

No, Daniel made no such statement, and it is clear you're reading something into the text that isn't there.

Daniel 12
7 Then I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand to heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever, that it shall be for a time, times, and half a time; and when the power of the holy people has been completely shattered, all these things shall be finished.
8 Although I heard, I did not understand. Then I said, "My lord, what shall be the end of these things?"
9 And he said, "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.​

What Daniel had just been shown was specified to pertain to a time far ahead of him. It does not apply to anything else, and it is not conditional, as "all these things shall be finished".

Prophecy does have a proper time for fulfillment. If that time comes and goes without the prophecy being fulfilled then that particular prophecy will never be fulfilled. Such is the case for the prophecies in Jer.31:31 and Dan. 9:24.

Neither is a conditional prophecy, and both have been fulfilled. God promised an end to transgressions, and that has been accomplished. God promised a new covenant, and that has also been fulfilled.

Please note who the prophecy of Jer.31:31 is addressed to: the house of Israel AND the house of Judah.

The covenant to come was called "new" pertinent to them because they were the sole recipients of the first covenant that was to be replaced. For the Gentiles, reception of the new covenant wasn't "new" in that it replaced a prior covenant, because they never received the covenant from Mount Sinai.

At the time Jeremiah was given this particular prophecy the southern kingdom of Judah was in residence in Palestine (today's location) and the northern kingdom of Israel was no longer in existence, having been taken into captivity and disbursed. A little later Babylon took Judah into captivity.

It appears that you confused the "who" with the "where", and this point isn't germane at all.

This Covenant was going to be 'renewed' with both houses of Israel as it had been in the days of Israel at Sinai and before either kingdom was taken captive. The word in Hebrew is Strongs 2318 - chadash, meaning causatively to renew. God is telling Jeremiah that He is planning on renewing the Covenant that He gave His kingdom at Sinai with both the houses of Israel and Judah, and that renewal would take place in the hearts and minds of the people of BOTH the southern and northern kingdoms when they rejoined to form a unified Israel again.

No, it wasn't Jeremiah who wrote that at all. That was Daniel talking about a unrelated promise to unify the two people at a time in the end, consistent with Ezekiel, and Daniel's vision has no relation to Jeremiah nor is it conditional. Unification of Israel has no relation to a new covenant at all. You're using the curse of Isaiah 28:13 of assembling disparate messages to synthesize a new message none of the Biblical authors wrote, and it is a snare and a trap that deludes those who employ this method of eisegesis.

It would not be on tables of Stone as before. This indicates a change of location for the same Covenant, NOT a completely different Covenant than was previously given.

Jeremiah specified a new covenant, and that alone makes the one it replaced obsolete - just as Hebrews 8:13 concludes. Moreover, Jeremiah 31:32 specifies the new covenant would not be according to the covenant issued at Mount Sinai, settling the matter of the first covenant becoming obsolete. It wasn't the content inscribed on tables of stone that would change location, as that law wasn't written into anyone. It is God's "My law" that enters us, which is not according to Sinai. This is a personal pronoun that suggests God owns this "law" and is also subject to this "law". The result of this "law" entering us is a personal knowledge of the Creator, and not the created anymore (Jeremiah 31:34). This was fulfilled as Peter observed, recorded in Acts 15 when the council at Jerusalem considered the requirement of believing Pharisees to become circumcised and comply with the law mediated by Moses:

7 And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: "Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.
8 "So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us,
9 "and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 "Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 "But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they."​

The Gentiles received the law that gave them personal knowledge of God, and they never received the law from Mount Sinai and they were never instructed to keep it. Suggesting that the law from Mount Sinai entered anyone is absurd when you find that no one is moved by the Holy Ghost to revive the Levitical priesthood, make the twice-daily oblations of burnt offerings, and attempt to keep the sabbath day holy according to the law that ordained it. All of these things were ordained at Mount Sinai, and have jurisdiction equal to the tables of stone with the Ten Commandments during the first covenant's tenure.

This would only have occurred had Israel completed the task for which God had re-established them when He would bring them out of captivity in Babylon. See Dan. 9:24. Israel did not fulfill their role in finishing the requirements of this prophecy, therefore God did not re-establish BOTH Judah and Israel as ONE nation, and therefore God did not, and will never, re-establish or renew the Covenant with the descendants of Israel. Neither the prophecy of Dan. 9:24 or of Jer. 31:31 will be fulfilled because Israel rejected their King and put Him on a cross. In 33 CE at the end of the 490 years of Dan. 9:24 the status of Kingdom of Heaven was removed from Israel, making any prophecies concerning Israel and their role in the time of the end moot and of none effect.

This hybrid assembly of disparate points was already shown to be a trap you fabricated.

Israel as God's Kingdom no longer exists and therefore any prophecies that have not already been fulfilled will never be fulfilled for Israel, including the so called 'new covenant' that Paul bases his entire salvation theology on.

First of all, Galatians 4:1-7 builds on the exact point Jesus taught Peter in Matthew 17:24-26, showing that Paul is consistent with Jesus. Second of all, you again concluded prophecy will never be fulfilled because you suggest tying God's hands with the failures of mankind and making His Word void. That Israel hasn't been written into the dustbin of history shows that you're not cognizant of events that have transpired the last few decades.

Jeremiah 16
14 "Therefore behold, the days are coming," says the LORD, "that it shall no more be said, `The LORD lives who brought up the children of Israel from the land of Egypt,'
15 "but, `The LORD lives who brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north and from all the lands where He had driven them.' For I will bring them back into their land which I gave to their fathers.
16 "Behold, I will send for many fishermen," says the LORD, "and they shall fish them; and afterward I will send for many hunters, and they shall hunt them from every mountain and every hill, and out of the holes of the rocks.
17 "For My eyes are on all their ways; they are not hidden from My face, nor is their iniquity hidden from My eyes.​

This prophecy has happened, and hunters such as Adolf Hitler have driven the people back to the land that was given to their fathers. Isaiah 66:8's "one day" was fulfilled in 1948.

THIS DID NOT HAPPEN, AND NEVER WILL HAPPEN because the time for the fulfillment of this prophecy is long past.

This takes you right back to Matthew 5.

17 ¶ "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.
18 "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.​

Jesus stated it will happen, history records that it did happen, and your artificial litmus test didn't affect God's performance in the slightest.

 

[Soon144k]

VictorC said, "Neither is a conditional prophecy, and both have been fulfilled. God promised an end to transgressions, and that has been accomplished. God promised a new covenant, and that has also been fulfilled."

So, if God has put an end to transgressions (at the cross, and I suppose through grace because the Law is done away with) then please tell me why there is still transgression and sin in the world. Oh, thats right, this is only for the people of God who believe that they no longer sin because there is no law to sin against. My mistake.

As the text in Jer. 31:31 clearly states the renewed covenant was for the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Both of those houses have Fallen, have Fallen (twice fallen) and are no longer the Kingdom of Heaven. The Covenant is no longer in effect for them, so to whom does this 'new' covenant apply? Everyone? The World?

 

[Soon144k]

God has always given two prophetic lines or choices for His Kingdom to choose between. I term these the 'life road' and the 'death road'. Every prophecy has two outcomes based on the choices presented; one leads to the outcome God wants, which is life; the other is the outcome that leads to death.

(15) “See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. [wash my mouth] (16) If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it. [wash my mouth] (17) But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, [wash my mouth] (18) I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish. You shall not live long in the land that you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess. [wash my mouth] (19) I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live. Deut.30:15-19.

All end time prophecy for ancient Israel has these two conditions or choices. The confirmation of this is that we are not living in a world in which people live lives as long as a tree and then die, where transgression and sin no longer exist, where God Almighty rules in power from Jerusalem, and where Israel is still the Kingdom of Heaven on earth. All of this would have been the fulfillment of prophecy had Israel chosen the 'life road' options in prophecy.

As it is Israel has been divested of the trusteeship of the Covenant (in 33 CE) and is no longer the Kingdom of Heaven. That Kingdom has been given to another people (Dan.2:44-45) and will never be taken away from that people. That Kingdom will smash the kingdoms of the world to pieces. Therefore, the prophecies given to Daniel and Jeremiah and Isaiah about the end of time for Israel as over, and those that have not yet been fulfilled will never be. The prophecies that God gave John in Revelation will all be fulfilled because they are not conditional upon the choice of the Kingdom of Heaven. That Kingdom WILL do the job that God has called them to do, and the events at the end of time will unfold exactly as defined in the prophecies related to THAT Kingdom.

 

[VictorC]

VictorC said, "Neither is a conditional prophecy, and both have been fulfilled. God promised an end to transgressions, and that has been accomplished. God promised a new covenant, and that has also been fulfilled."

So, if God has put an end to transgressions (at the cross, and I suppose through grace because the Law is done away with) then please tell me why there is still transgression and sin in the world. Oh, thats right, this is only for the people of God who believe that they no longer sin because there is no law to sin against. My mistake.

At least you admit making a mistake, to your credit. There is no transgression to a law that doesn't exist, and sin's origin before the law existed and sin's continuence after God's redemption is the very reason we have God's promise "I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more".

As the text in Jer. 31:31 clearly states the renewed covenant was for the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Both of those houses have Fallen, have Fallen (twice fallen) and are no longer the Kingdom of Heaven. The Covenant is no longer in effect for them, so to whom does this 'new' covenant apply? Everyone? The World?

You've fallen back to your premise of a renewal of the covenant that Jeremiah stated would be replaced, and hint at a prophecy regarding mystery Babylon that isn't germane at all. You're a fan of taking bits and pieces of God's Word and assembling a message He never presented, and it is a snare and a trap that has taken you away from the Gospel.

 

[VictorC]

As it is Israel has been divested of the trusteeship of the Covenant (in 33 CE) and is no longer the Kingdom of Heaven. That Kingdom has been given to another people (Dan.2:44-45) and will never be taken away from that people.

Daniel's prophecy of the termination of a lineage of Gentile nation-states has no relationship to the old covenant that was never conveyed to any of them. This is reaching into a vacuum to supply substance where there is none to support you.

 

[Soon144k]

VictorC said, "Neither is a conditional prophecy, and both have been fulfilled. God promised an end to transgressions, and that has been accomplished. God promised a new covenant, and that has also been fulfilled."

So, if God has put an end to transgressions (at the cross, and I suppose through grace because the Law is done away with) then please tell me why there is still transgression and sin in the world. Oh, thats right, this is only for the people of God who believe that they no longer sin because there is no law to sin against. My mistake.

I'm so sorry, VictorC. I was participating in irony, which I thought you would get. Obviously you didn't, and I am sorry.

The fact that you believe that God changed His requirements for His Kingdom from a Lawful Covenant to 'new covenant' without Law is tragic and is not supported by the words and teachings of Jesus Christ, or any teaching in the Old Testament. The fact that you remain intransigent in your belief just shows that you have neither eyes nor ears to hear and see the truth. God did not, has never, and will never change an iota of the Covenant for His Kingdom. If the 'old' Covenant was faulty, as Paul states, then so was God; and God cannot be faulty and still be God. Therefore, the 'god' that changed the Covenant from the 10 Commandments to the 'new covenant' of grace cannot be the same God that instituted the Covenant (Deut.4:13) in the first place. This you cannot see, or you refuse to see-one or the other. One is forgivable, the other is not. Please tell me as clearly as possible why you believe that God would create a faulty covenant that He knew could not be kept in the first instance only to have to change it in the second to one that does not need to be kept to apply to salvation. I do not understand how this works.

 

[VictorC]

The fact that you believe that God changed His requirements for His Kingdom from a Lawful Covenant to 'new covenant' without Law is tragic and is not supported by the words and teachings of Jesus Christ, or any teaching in the Old Testament. The fact that you remain intransigent in your belief just shows that you have neither eyes nor ears to hear and see the truth. God did not, has never, and will never change an iota of the Covenant for His Kingdom. If the 'old' Covenant was faulty, as Paul states, then so was God; and God cannot be faulty and still be God. Therefore, the 'god' that changed the Covenant from the 10 Commandments to the 'new covenant' of grace cannot be the same God that instituted the Covenant (Deut.4:13) in the first place. This you cannot see, or you refuse to see-one or the other. One is forgivable, the other is not. Please tell me as clearly as possible why you believe that God would create a faulty covenant that He knew could not be kept in the first instance only to have to change it in the second to one that does not need to be kept to apply to salvation. I do not understand how this works.

It wasn't Paul who stated that the first covenant was faulty, and a possible suggestion that Paul influenced Jeremiah isn't going to be accepted. The conclusions that you reach based on equating the created with the Creator aren't going to meet with sympathy, either.

I have noticed that your explanation is consistent with Judaism, and yet to this point in time you will not comment on your submission to circumcision, a Levitical priesthood, and the mandate for burnt offerings. These are all obligations under the first covenant, and I suspect that you haven't complied with any of these. A motive to drive others to return to the tenets of Judaism while you aren't willing to lead by example isn't acceptable.

 

[Soon144k]

It wasn't Paul who stated that the first covenant was faulty, and a possible suggestion that Paul influenced Jeremiah isn't going to be accepted. The conclusions that you reach based on equating the created with the Creator aren't going to meet with sympathy, either.

I have noticed that your explanation is consistent with Judaism, and yet to this point in time you will not comment on your submission to circumcision, a Levitical priesthood, and the mandate for burnt offerings. These are all obligations under the first covenant, and I suspect that you haven't complied with any of these. A motive to drive others to return to the tenets of Judaism while you aren't willing to lead by example isn't acceptable.

Actually, it was Paul that first stated that the Covenant was faulty and was in need of being replaced. Like you, he misinterprets Jer.31:31 as being a brand new and different covenant when in fact it is a RENEWAL of the same Covenant that God gave Israel at Sinai. This is confirmed by Jesus Christ in Revelation 12:17: "Then the dragon became furious with the woman and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus."

Note that these 'offspring' of the Woman (the Holy Spirit) actually keep the Commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus.

Another confirmation that the Covenant is that which all are measured against in the judgement is found at the sounding of the 7th Trumpet where the Ark of the Covenant is seen IN HEAVEN by all of those who are left alive at the end of the Trumpets:

Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.” Rev.11:15.

Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail. Rev.11:19.

This shows that it is the 10 Commandments that God used to test those that dwell on the earth:

Because you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth. Rev.3:10.

This TEST is not whether or not you have accepted the salvation of Jesus Christ by grace through faith. It is that you have kept the commandments of God and have trusted in the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The fact that you believe that you will not have to go through this test will demonstrate to God that you have no regard for developing a Christ-like character, which is based in obedience to the Commandments of God.

Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.” John 14:21.

Those that keep the Commandments of God will be repaid with life, those that don't will receive death. This outcome is not based on what you believe Jesus either did of did not do FOR you, but it is solely based on whether you were obedient to God, or not.

“Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay everyone for what he has done. Rev.22:12.

This is why what Paul taught, and what you believe, is so insidious and deceptive. By claiming that the Covenant of the Kingdom of Heaven has been replaced by a 'new' covenant in Christ's blood, and that eternal life is gifted to those who merely 'say' that they believe in Jesus Christ and are saved by grace in spite of what they do because they have faith that this is true are in for a rude awakening. When these people realize that they have been duped (foolish) and that they are lost forever they will be furious with God for allowing this to happen to them, and demand from Him their just reward of eternal life because they believed in Him. They do not believe they are to be held accountable for what they know and what they do. He will tell them that HE never knew them. There will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth.

 

[VictorC]

Those that keep the Commandments of God will be repaid with life, those that don't will receive death. This outcome is not based on what you believe Jesus either did of did not do FOR you, but it is solely based on whether you were obedient to God, or not.

We recognize this as a classic soteriology based on your works, another tenet of Judaism. And yet to this point in time you will not comment on your submission to circumcision, a Levitical priesthood, and the mandate for burnt offerings. These are all obligations under the first covenant, and I suspect that you haven't complied with any of these. A motive to drive others to return to the tenets of Judaism while you aren't willing to lead by example isn't acceptable.

Somehow your actions nullify your previous claim that anyone wrote the commandments contained in the first covenant into your heart or mind, and it isn't difficult to see that you aren't compliant with your own claim of obedience requisite to earn eternal life.

 

[Soon144k]

We recognize this as a classic soteriology based on your works, another tenet of Judaism. And yet to this point in time you will not comment on your submission to circumcision, a Levitical priesthood, and the mandate for burnt offerings. These are all obligations under the first covenant, and I suspect that you haven't complied with any of these. A motive to drive others to return to the tenets of Judaism while you aren't willing to lead by example isn't acceptable.

Somehow your actions nullify your previous claim that anyone wrote the commandments contained in the first covenant into your heart or mind, and it isn't difficult to see that you aren't compliant with your own claim of obedience requisite to earn eternal life.

You obviously have no legal experience, otherwise you would know the difference between a Covenant/contract and a statute. The Covenant of the Kingdom is the 10 Commandments as stated in Deut.4:13. The Statutes are the laws pertaining to the operation of the Kingdom of Heaven/Literal Israel AT THAT TIME. They are NOT obligations under the Covenant, they are obligations under the Statues or operating guidelines of the Nation of Israel. These statutes involve the Feasts, circumcision, offerings, etc. When Israel refused to become the Kingdom the final time at the end of the 490 years of Dan.9:24 these statutes became moot and of none effect. Yet that which separated the Kingdom of Heaven from the world as an identifier of that separation, the Covenant/10 Commandments, are still in effect for the NEW Kingdom that will appear at the end of time.

God did establish His Kingdom by Covenant at Sinai, and this was because God needed a righteous Kingdom that would take the message of truth about God to the world. God took Israel out of Egypt (the world) and separated them (made them holy) for His good purpose. He made them His Kingdom by decree, and though they were not yet righteous God established them as His Kingdom based on the promise that they would become righteous. God gave Israel two chances to become His righteous Kingdom and they failed both times (fallen, fallen is Babylon the Great). Just because they failed does not mean that the Covenant itself was faulty, or that Israel could not have accomplished what God desired for them to do.

The next time God establishes His Kingdom on earth it will have to become righteous BEFORE He makes them His Kingdom. This is what Jesus Christ taught about the Kingdom of Heaven while He was here on earth. He clearly explained that by Holy Spirit action a person could overcome sin and become righteous by abiding in the Words of Jesus Christ. This is the process of Sanctification. When this process is complete then that person is sealed in righteousness and becomes 'born again'. At that time they become a member of the Kingdom of Heaven.

The first to do this will be the Faithful and Wise Bondservant (Matt. 24:45). Next will be the fellow bondservants of this Faithful and Wise Bondservant, the 144,000 (Rev.3:4, Rev.7:4, Rev.14:1-5). After that will come the Saints, the 5 Wise Bridesmaids (Matt. 25:1-13, Rev.3:5) who are to prepare the Bride, and finally the vast un-numbered multitude (Rev.7:9) who is the Bride.