When will Elijah the prophet appear in the world?

[daq]

His words are clear:

The NASB mistakenly shows that "John himself is Elijah" which leads one to see John as The Elijah who came. As if the event is fulfilled and he was that prophesied one.

John himself tells us he was NOT Elijah. How do you reconcile this?

John is "one voice" crying in the wilderness...one of many. John is one of those coming in the spirit of Elijah who comes in a continuing process.

Who is Elijah/Elias who was to come...."If ye will receive it.... all the prophets and the law..... this is Elias."


I repeat....the identity of Elias is given us by Christ for he is:

Matthew 11:13-15 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
​

Though the point is well taken the understanding from this particular passage does not work because as shown in the previous quote from ebedmelech, where the Young's YLT was quoted, the word GSN#3195 "mello", ("about to happen" or "about to be") is employed in Matthew 11:14. The verse literally states: "And if you will receive it he, (GSN#846 autos) is Elijah that is ABOUT (GSN#3195 "mellon") to come." Likewise John does not have to be Elijah himself to have the mashiyach-anointing of Elijah upon him. This mashiyach they did with him whatsoever they pleased, as it is written of him, (written of him in Daniel 9:26). They karath-cut-off his head and he indeed was left with nothing, (that is, until the resurrection of Yeshua, the Nagiyd-Commander of the Briyth-Covenant, Daniel 9:24-27, Daniel 11:22). Perhaps this is part of that "rightly dividing" everyone is always talking about. Do the same with the lesser mashiyach-anointed one and the Greater Nagiyd Commander and Sar-Prince of Daniel.

 

[ebedmelech]

His words are clear:

The NASB mistakenly shows that "John himself is Elijah" which leads one to see John as The Elijah who came. As if the event is fulfilled and he was that prophesied one.

John himself tells us he was NOT Elijah. How do you reconcile this?

John is "one voice" crying in the wilderness...one of many. John is one of those coming in the spirit of Elijah who comes in a continuing process.

Who is Elijah/Elias who was to come...."If ye will receive it.... all the prophets and the law..... this is Elias."


I repeat....the identity of Elias is given us by Christ for he is:

Matthew 11:13-15 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
​

The NASB does no such thing. John the Baptist is the subject!

Let's (for the sake of argument) use the KJV translation and look at this passage:

v13
13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until l John. - so we have a subject which is John
v14
14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. - who is the "this"? It reflects back to the subject noun, which is John! You can insert John's name there and be just as correct!

Let's do that...
14 And if ye will receive it, John is Elias which was for to come.

You're not associating John as the subject in verse 14 when he is!

Now...let's take it a step further and look at Matthew 17:10-13, because it's plain as day there, because the disciples bring it up again:
10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

I'll leave it there...

 

[Interplanner]

How to reconcile John's statement vs Christ's? Christ's trumps.

 

[daq]

How to reconcile John's statement vs Christ's? Christ's trumps.

It is not a matter of one statement "trumping" the other. Both statements are correct. If Yochanan was the man Eliyahu-Elijah it would necessarily be a form of reincarnation. Eliyahu is thus the Spirit of all the prophets and this is revealed by the fact that it was Eliyahu that was commanded to anoint Yehu the son of Nimshi as king of Yisrael, (1 Kings 19:16). However, it was not the man Elijah, nor even Elisha who followed, but rather two prophets removed because it was "a young man of the sons of the prophets" who anointed Yehu, (2 Kings 9:1-10 and this was probably Yonah at a young age). This is what truly needs to be reconciled if one truly desires to understand because if Eliyahu did not anoint Yehu the son of Nimshi as king of Yisrael, as he was commanded, then the Scripture is broken. Therefore Eliyahu did indeed anoint Yehu as he was commanded to do and therefore likewise Eliyahu is the Spirit upon Yonah when he anoints Yehu. Yochanan the Immerser therefore also had the Spirit mashiyach-anointing of Eliyahu upon him but he himself was not Eliyahu at the time he made the statement.

 

[Interplanner]

But he was. Messiah declared that. Just like declaring that he was a temple. He even knew people would not accept it. I wonder who they were?

 

[ebedmelech]

It is not a matter of one statement "trumping" the other. Both statements are correct. If Yochanan was the man Eliyahu-Elijah it would necessarily be a form of reincarnation. Eliyahu is thus the Spirit of all the prophets and this is revealed by the fact that it was Eliyahu that was commanded to anoint Yehu the son of Nimshi as king of Yisrael, (1 Kings 19:16). However, it was not the man Elijah, nor even Elisha who followed, but rather two prophets removed because it was "a young man of the sons of the prophets" who anointed Yehu, (2 Kings 9:1-10 and this was probably Yonah at a young age). This is what truly needs to be reconciled if one truly desires to understand because if Eliyahu did not anoint Yehu the son of Nimshi as king of Yisrael, as he was commanded, then the Scripture is broken. Therefore Eliyahu did indeed anoint Yehu as he was commanded to do and therefore likewise Eliyahu is the Spirit upon Yonah when he anoints Yehu. Yochanan the Immerser therefore also had the Spirit mashiyach-anointing of Eliyahu upon him but he himself was not Eliyahu at the time he made the statement.

Well...not quite! I think if we walk through the scriptures on this it shouldn't be an issue.

Malachi 4:5, 6 is where we should start, allowing God to say HOW this is fulfilled:
5 “Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord.
6 He will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers, so that I will not come and smite the land with a curse.”

The first hint to HOW this is fulfilled comes at Luke 1:14-17 as Gabriel speaks to Zacharias:
14 You will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth.
15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb.
16 And he will turn many of the sons of Israel back to the Lord their God.
17 It is he who will go as a forerunner before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to the children, and the disobedient to the attitude of the righteous, so as to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

The underlined portion is now a partial quote of Malachi 4:6, so we know this relates to the prophecy God gave there.

In John 1:22 we will find John the Baptist denying to be Elijah:
21 They asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” And he *said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.”

John is answering correctly when he says he is not Elijah. This should then lead us back then to what Gabriel said...that John would be in "the spirit and power of Elijah".

At Matthew 11:7-15, the subject starts to come clear as Jesus speaks of John the Baptist at verses 12-14:
12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and violent men take it by force.
13 For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John.
14 And if you are willing to accept it, John himself is Elijah who was to come.
15 He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

When Jesus days "he who has ears to hear" this is a clue we should be looking spiritually! He says it many times, and when He does we MUST look spiritually to what's being said. Jesus is saying John the Baptist was "spiritually" Elijah. How? It should then take us back to when Elijah prophesied to called Israel back to God. It culminated on Mt Carmel when he stood against the prophets of Baal, to call Israel back to God. John is doing the same thing here! His role was to call Israel back to God through the Baptism of repentance looking forward to Christ coming. This was exactly what John did in his ministry!

Matthew 17:9-13 should put this to rest. After the Mt of Transfiguration where Peter, James, and John had seen Jesus glorified, and speaking with Moses and Elijah, the disciples become confused, so here's the scene:
9 As they were coming down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, “Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man has risen from the dead.”
10 And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?”
11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things;
12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”
13 Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist.

I think from this, it should be pretty clear that God is calling John the Baptist Elijah, because he is a type of Elijah in his prophetic role, and that is how we are to understand Malachi 4:5, 6.

The disciples had been taught by the scribes Elijah would literally come, and Jesus has just explained how that was to be understood.

That's how I understand Malachi 4:5, 6...

 

[Bible2]

ebedmelech said in post 666:

Matthew 17:9-13 should put this to rest. After the Mt of Transfiguration where Peter, James, and John had seen Jesus glorified, and speaking with Moses and Elijah, the disciples become confused, so here's the scene:
9 As they were coming down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, “Tell the vision to no one until the Son of Man has risen from the dead.”
10 And His disciples asked Him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?”
11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things;
12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”
13 Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist.

I think from this, it should be pretty clear that God is calling John the Baptist Elijah, because he is a type of Elijah in his prophetic role, and that is how we are to understand Malachi 4:5, 6.

That's right.

ebedmelech said in post 666:

The disciples had been taught by the scribes Elijah would literally come, and Jesus has just explained how that was to be understood.

Matthew 17:10-13 can be understood as referring to two different comings of Elijah, the first being John the Baptist's coming "in the spirit and power of Elijah" (Luke 1:17, Matthew 17:12-13), and the 2nd being a still-future physical coming-back of Elijah himself, when he will restore all things (Matthew 17:11), in the sense of restoring all true doctrine, i.e. all true interpretation of the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16), to the church. This still-future, physical coming-back of Elijah himself could occur at the midpoint of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, when Elijah could come back bodily from heaven as one of the two witnesses (Revelation 11:3-12).

That is, in Revelation 11:3-12 the two witnesses could be literally Moses and Elijah. For the two men seen "standing before the God of the earth" (Revelation 11:4) at the transfiguration were Moses and Elijah (Matthew 17:3). And in Revelation 11:4. the "two olive trees" refer back to the two men who were already standing by the Lord by the time of the prophet Zechariah (Zechariah 4:11,14), which was subsequent to the times of Moses and Elijah.

Moses and Elijah could come down from heaven in their mortal bodies at the midpoint of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, just as they came down at the transfiguration. Also, the plagues that the two witnesses will cause (Revelation 11:6,5) will match plagues that Moses and Elijah caused in Old Testament times (James 5:17, Exodus 7:20; 2 Kings 1:10-14).

Elijah never died, but was taken bodily into heaven (2 Kings 2:11b). And Michael retrieved Moses' dead body from Satan (Jude 1:9). Michael could have then taken Moses' body into heaven, where it could have been resuscitated back to mortal life, like, for example, Lazarus' dead body was resuscitated back to mortal life (John 12:1). This would explain how both Moses and Elijah could appear alive and well at the transfiguration (Matthew 17:3).

The two witnesses will prophesy and bring plagues on the world during the future, literal 3.5 years (Revelation 11:2b,3,6) of the Antichrist's worldwide reign (Revelation 13:5,7, Revelation 12:6,14), which will be in the latter half of the future tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24. That is why the Antichrist's reign will legally end (Revelation 11:15) right after the time of the two witnesses on the earth will end (Revelation 11:12-15). The plagues that they will bring (Revelation 11:6) will be part of the tribulation's 2nd woe/6th trumpet (Revelation 11:14, Revelation 9:12-13). They will be taken up to heaven before the tribulation's 7th trumpet sounds (Revelation 11:12,15).

They may not be witnesses in the sense of evangelizing the world (Acts 1:8). For the original Greek word (martus, G3144) translated as "witnesses" (Revelation 11:3) can also refer to those who witness against people and bring punishment against them (Acts 7:58). The reason that there will be two witnesses (Revelation 11:3) who will bring plagues to torment the unrepentant world (Revelation 11:6,10b) would be because two witnesses are required to bring judgment against people (1 Timothy 5:19). At the same time, the two "witnesses" could be called that because both of them will be martyred (Revelation 11:7-9). For the same Greek word translated as "witnesses" (Revelation 11:3) can refer to "martyrs" (Revelation 17:6).

 

[YeShallTread]

How to reconcile John's statement vs Christ's? Christ's trumps.

When man sees a seeming discrepancy in God's Word...man needs to look to himself as not understanding rather than thinking what is written is wrong....as is the case here.

John said he was not Elijah but was the voice of one.

Jesus said all the law and prophets...this is Elias (if you will receive it...if you have ears to hear.)

If He was stating that John the Baptist (himself alone) was Elijah then...why have ears, why have difficulty receiving it? You could simply read it as many do and many are not hearing what is being said. They are not receiving the meaning.

Jesus is telling us to look deeper! John was one of those in the spirit of Elijah.

 

[YeShallTread]

Though the point is well taken the understanding from this particular passage does not work because as shown in the previous quote from ebedmelech, where the Young's YLT was quoted, the word GSN#3195 "mello", ("about to happen" or "about to be") is employed in Matthew 11:14. The verse literally states: "And if you will receive it he, (GSN#846 autos) is Elijah that is ABOUT (GSN#3195 "mellon") to come." Likewise John does not have to be Elijah himself to have the mashiyach-anointing of Elijah upon him. This mashiyach they did with him whatsoever they pleased, as it is written of him, (written of him in Daniel 9:26). They karath-cut-off his head and he indeed was left with nothing, (that is, until the resurrection of Yeshua, the Nagiyd-Commander of the Briyth-Covenant, Daniel 9:24-27, Daniel 11:22). Perhaps this is part of that "rightly dividing" everyone is always talking about. Do the same with the lesser mashiyach-anointed one and the Greater Nagiyd Commander and Sar-Prince of Daniel.

Actually...I prefer "about to come" for John was about to be slain. Many more were about to come after John and that continues today. Elias was one crying in the wilderness. There are many today doing that same thing...done in the spirit of Elias which is....all the law and the prophets.

How are they treated as they teach the law and prophecies of God?

 

[YeShallTread]

The NASB does no such thing. John the Baptist is the subject!

Let's (for the sake of argument) use the KJV translation and look at this passage:

v13
13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until l John. - so we have a subject which is John

Is John the subject or..."all the prophets and the law?"

v14
14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. - who is the "this"? It reflects back to the subject noun, which is John! You can insert John's name there and be just as correct!

You can insert "all the prophets and the law"...this is Elias....if you will receive it!

Let's do that...
14 And if ye will receive it, John is Elias which was for to come.

You're not associating John as the subject in verse 14 when he is!

No, let's not change the Word of God.

Now...let's take it a step further and look at Matthew 17:10-13, because it's plain as day there, because the disciples bring it up again:
10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

I'll leave it there...

May I ask...did John the Baptist "restore all things?" He was "one" of those coming as Elias...Elias continues his return in today's prophets and apostles as they teach "the law and prophets." For the prophets and law are Elias!


You quote Malachi...please read the words contained there:

Malachi 4:1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

4:5-6 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
​

What is the time frame? Elijah is sent (law and prophets) in His many apostles and prophets today as they teach "before the coming of the great and dreadful day." They give truth so that the hearts are turned to God.

 

[daq]

Actually...I prefer "about to come" for John was about to be slain. Many more were about to come after John and that continues today. Elias was one crying in the wilderness. There are many today doing that same thing...done in the spirit of Elias which is....all the law and the prophets.

How are they treated as they teach the law and prophecies of God?

They continue to imagine that they do with him whatsoever they please every time he shows up on the scene, (there is nothing new under the sun). However, it is much different now, for one cannot kill what has already been killed and raised again anymore then he can stab Spirit with a kitchen knife.

 

[ebedmelech]

Is John the subject or..."all the prophets and the law?"

John is the subject. the point made by the "law and the prophets" is that John is the turning point. That's what it follows "until John" John ushers in the New Testament as the forrunner of Christ.

You can insert "all the prophets and the law"...this is Elias....if you will receive it!

Take time to read the passage, which starts at Matt 11:7

No, let's not change the Word of God.

Oh brother! I rarely use "smilies" but to that reply I go...

May I ask...did John the Baptist "restore all things?" He was "one" of those coming as Elias...Elias continues his return in today's prophets and apostles as they teach "the law and prophets." For the prophets and law are Elias!

That's not the point. The point of the passage is that Jesus clearly says John was Elijah.

You quote Malachi...please read the words contained there:

Malachi 4:1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

4:5-6 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
​

What is the time frame? Elijah is sent (law and prophets) in His many apostles and prophets today as they teach "before the coming of the great and dreadful day." They give truth so that the hearts are turned to God.

You're really "straining at a gnat" now...because you really miss the word "until". Once more look at the verse...Matthew 11:13:
13 For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John.

Are you seeing that John is a "turning point" (if you will)...he comes with the "baptism of repentance" to prepare the people to receive Christ, who brings a new covenant.

 

[YeShallTread]

John is the subject. the point made by the "law and the prophets" is that John is the turning point. That's what it follows "until John" John ushers in the New Testament as the forrunner of Christ.



Take time to read the passage, which starts at Matt 11:7


Oh brother! I rarely use "smilies" but to that reply I go...


That's not the point. The point of the passage is that Jesus clearly says John was Elijah.

Certainly it is the point if you have ears!

Both Jesus and John clearly said things; John clearly said he was not. You must rectify the two for neither told a lie.

You're really "straining at a gnat" now...because you really miss the word "until". Once more look at the verse...Matthew 11:13:

You are ignoring the Malachi passages you use that relates to the end of days, not the time of John.

13 For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John.

Are you seeing that John is a "turning point" (if you will)...he comes with the "baptism of repentance" to prepare the people to receive Christ, who brings a new covenant.

Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.

The "now" was the turning point...the "now" being the time of Jesus Christ.
​

11:13-15 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. Andif ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

 

[ebedmelech]

Certainly it is the point if you have ears!

Both Jesus and John clearly said things; John clearly said he was not. You must rectify the two for neither told a lie.

You can either take all the passages and understand what Jesus is saying, or keep going your way. There's no need to keep going in circles. Jesus...Matthew 17:11-13
11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things;
12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”
13 Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist.

You are ignoring the Malachi passages you use that relates to the end of days, not the time of John.

No they don't. They speak of two periods in time...Malachi 4:5:
5 “Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord.
Elijah comes before "the great and terrible day of the Lord". That day is coming, but Elijah will do something before that day...Malachi 4:6:
6 He will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers, so that I will not come and smite the land with a curse.”

Unless you just think Gabriel was just teasing, he makes it pretty clear in Luke 1:15-17
15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb.
16 And he will turn many of the sons of Israel back to the Lord their God.
17 It is he who will go as a forerunner before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to the children, and the disobedient to the attitude of the righteous, so as to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

Now...Gabriel is quoting from Malachi...are you ever going to deal with that, or are you going to keep ignoring it?

Matthew 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.

The "now" was the turning point...the "now" being the time of Jesus Christ.
​

11:13-15 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. Andif ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Are you going to keep ignoring "UNTIL JOHN"? That means John is the stopping point of the "law and the prophets"! Now...why is that? That's because he was the FORERUNNER to Jesus. So what did Jesus say He came to do? That would be Matthew 5:17:
17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.

Jesus fulfilled the "law and the prophets" at the cross!!!

At this point I think instead of trying to understand, you're trying to win the argument...because it's pretty clear from all that's been said...you don't want to be confused with the facts.

 

[Interplanner]

Ye:
btw, as a reference about the timestamp of "end of time" remember you're reading something from the 4th cent. BC and they knew of the "times" of Daniel that were to come to an end at the coming of the 1st century. John the Baptist said 'the end is near' as did Jesus.

 

[Bible2]

ebedmelech said in post 672:

Once more look at the verse...Matthew 11:13:
13 For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John.

Are you seeing that John is a "turning point" (if you will)...he comes with the "baptism of repentance" to prepare the people to receive Christ, who brings a new covenant.

That's a great point. For some people think that a future Elijah is coming to restore a perfect obedience to the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law. They base this on what Malachi 4:4 says before Malachi 4:5-6. But Malachi 4:4 was spoken back when the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law was still in effect. It doesn't apply to today or to our future. For on Jesus' Cross, for both Jews and Gentiles (John 11:51-52), of all times, the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law was abolished (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18), disannulled (Hebrews 7:18), rendered obsolete (Hebrews 8:13, Galatians 3:2-25, Galatians 4:21 to 5:8), taken away and replaced (Hebrews 10:9) by the better hope (Hebrews 7:19), the better covenant (Hebrews 7:22, Hebrews 8:6-12), the 2nd covenant (Hebrews 8:7, Hebrews 10:9), of Jesus' New Covenant law (Galatians 6:2, John 1:17, Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 12:24, Hebrews 9:15), so that the law was changed (Hebrews 7:12).

All believers, both Jews and Gentles, of all times, are delivered from the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law and shouldn't keep it (Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Galatians 2:11-21) or have any desire to keep it (Galatians 4:21 to 5:8, Galatians 3:2-25). Believers keep the spirit of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Romans 7:6) by loving others (Galatians 5:14, Romans 13:8-10), by doing to others as they would have others do to them (Matthew 7:12).

The New Covenant is a new law (Hebrews 7:12,18,19, Hebrews 10:1-23), consisting of Jesus' New Covenant/New Testament commandments (John 14:15), such as those he gave in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:19 to 7:29) and in the epistles of Paul the apostle (1 Corinthians 14:37). These commandments exceed in righteousness the abolished letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Matthew 5:20-48). So there is no reason why any believer should ever want to go back under the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (Galatians 3:2 to 5:26). It was just a temporary schoolmaster (Galatians 3:24-25), a temporary shadow (Colossians 2:16-17), which God set up because of sins long after he had set up the original promise of the Abrahamic Covenant, and long before he brought that promise to fulfillment in Jesus' New Covenant (Galatians 3:16-29, Matthew 26:28).

The letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law has been made obsolete by the New Covenant (Hebrews 8:13). For example, the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law required an Aaronic priesthood (Exodus 30:30), whereas the New Covenant replaced the Aaronic priesthood with the Melchisedechian priesthood (Hebrews 7:11-28). Also, the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law required animal sacrifices (e.g. Leviticus 23:19), whereas the New Covenant replaced those with the one-time sacrifice of Jesus (Hebrews 10).

The letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law is the Hagar to the New Covenant's Sarah (Galatians 4:22-25), so that those people, whether Jews or Gentiles, who try to keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law are like Ishmael, whereas those people, whether Jews or Gentiles, who keep the New Covenant are like Isaac (Galatians 4:22-31).

The letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law (including the letter of the 10 commandments), written and engraven in stones (2 Corinthians 3:7, Deuteronomy 4:13, Deuteronomy 27:8), was the ministration of death and condemnation (2 Corinthians 3:7,9). For example, see Leviticus 20:10, Exodus 31:14, and Numbers 15:32-36; and contrast these with the New Covenant's John 8:4-11 and Matthew 12:1-8. The letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law has been done away (2 Corinthians 3:11), abolished (2 Corinthians 3:13b). But it is still able to spiritually blind some people as with a veil from beholding Jesus (2 Corinthians 3:14-16), whereas the New Covenant is the ministration of the spirit and righteousness (2 Corinthians 3:6,8,9b), which remains (2 Corinthians 3:11b), and which permits believers to remove the veil and to behold Jesus (2 Corinthians 3:16-18, Mark 15:38, Hebrews 7:18-19, Ephesians 2:15-18, Colossians 2:14-17).

But a mistaken spirit of Pharisaism can still sometimes deceive even Christians into thinking that they must keep the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law in order to be saved (Acts 15:1,5), or in order to become perfect (Galatians 3:2 to 5:26). This is a false, cursed gospel (Galatians 1:6-9). For if any believers are keeping any part of the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, thinking that they must do so in order to be saved, or in order to become perfect, then Jesus will profit them nothing; they have fallen from grace (Galatians 5:2-8).

*******

ebedmelech said in post 674:

So what did Jesus say he came to do? That would be Matthew 5:17:
17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.

Jesus fulfilled the "law and the prophets" at the cross!!!

Matthew 5:17-18 means that Jesus came the first time not to abolish the prophecies in the Mosaic law and the Old Testament prophets regarding the Christ's first coming, but to fulfill all those prophecies (Luke 24:44-48; e.g. Acts 3:22-26, Isaiah 53). Matthew 5:17-18 can't mean that Jesus came not to abolish the letter of the commandments of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, for he did come to do that, on the Cross (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19). Also, Matthew 5:17-18 can't mean that Jesus came to fulfill the letter of all the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments, for he couldn't possibly have done that. For example, some of those commandments applied only to women after childbirth (Leviticus 12:4-8), or to wives suspected of adultery by their husbands (Numbers 5:19-31).

As the Christ (Matthew 5:17, Luke 24:44-46), the mediator of the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 12:24, Hebrews 7:22, Hebrews 8:6-9), Jesus had the divine authority to contradict the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments and replace them with his own, even better, New Covenant commandments (Matthew 5:38-44, Matthew 19:7-9, John 8:5-7), such as those he gave in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:19 to 7:29) and in the epistles of Paul the apostle (1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 4:2). And as the Christ, Jesus had the divine authority to allow his disciples to break the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments (Matthew 12:1-8).

 

[Interplanner]

B2,
you are a marvel of oversimplification (about women in childbirth). If you knew the Bible you might have noticed this:

Jesus was also baptized for he said "It is necessary to fulfill all righteousness." What in the world? I suppose that was in the Law in some gematriacal way! You have no sense for the living, vital meaning of the text.

If you say anything else like that childbirth remark, it will be good reason to stop reading you altogether.

 

[ebedmelech]

Matthew 5:17-18 means that Jesus came the first time not to abolish the prophecies in the Mosaic law and the Old Testament prophets regarding the Christ's first coming, but to fulfill all those prophecies (Luke 24:44-48; e.g. Acts 3:22-26, Isaiah 53). Matthew 5:17-18 can't mean that Jesus came not to abolish the letter of the commandments of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, for he did come to do that, on the Cross (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19). Also, Matthew 5:17-18 can't mean that Jesus came to fulfill the letter of all the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments, for he couldn't possibly have done that. For example, some of those commandments applied only to women after childbirth (Leviticus 12:4-8), or to wives suspected of adultery by their husbands (Numbers 5:19-31).

As the Christ (Matthew 5:17, Luke 24:44-46), the mediator of the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 12:24, Hebrews 7:22, Hebrews 8:6-9), Jesus had the divine authority to contradict the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments and replace them with his own, even better, New Covenant commandments (Matthew 5:38-44, Matthew 19:7-9, John 8:5-7), such as those he gave in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:19 to 7:29) and in the epistles of Paul the apostle (1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 4:2). And as the Christ, Jesus had the divine authority to allow his disciples to break the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments (Matthew 12:1-8).

You have a profound problem with what you're saying Bible2. Once again read what Jesus said at John 5:17
17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.
18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
We're not under two covenants! They definitely have to be different because there's and Old and a New. Sin is defined by the Law to show us our need for Christ. Christ being the only one to never violate the Law fulfills it for us, and when we becomes saved Christ perfect obedience is credited to us.

Now...the problem with what you say is Romans 8:2:
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.
Think about that one!

Also, the disciples didn't violate anything...and Jesus would not allow them to! What law was broken? NONE! Under the Law you could do what the disciples did! It was stated in Deuteronomy 23:25:
25 “When you enter your neighbor’s standing grain, then you may pluck the heads with your hand, but you shall not wield a sickle in your neighbor’s standing grain.
There was no violation of the Law!

 

[YeShallTread]

Wait...let me put on sunglasses to see if I can block the distracting bright colors.


Okay, now.....

You can either take all the passages and understand what Jesus is saying, or keep going your way. There's no need to keep going in circles. Jesus...Matthew 17:11-13
11 And He answered and said, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things;
12 but I say to you that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands.”
13 Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist.

I'm not going in circles...I have read the passage and...I UNDERSTAND THE PASSAGE!!!

No they don't. They speak of two periods in time...Malachi 4:5:
5 “Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord.
Elijah comes before "the great and terrible day of the Lord". That day is coming, but Elijah will do something before that day...Malachi 4:6:
6 He will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers, so that I will not come and smite the land with a curse.”

Unless you just think Gabriel was just teasing, he makes it pretty clear in Luke 1:15-17
15 For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb.
16 And he will turn many of the sons of Israel back to the Lord their God.
17 It is he who will go as a forerunner before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers back to the children, and the disobedient to the attitude of the righteous, so as to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

Now...Gabriel is quoting from Malachi...are you ever going to deal with that, or are you going to keep ignoring it?

Are you going to keep ignoring "UNTIL JOHN"? That means John is the stopping point of the "law and the prophets"! Now...why is that? That's because he was the FORERUNNER to Jesus. So what did Jesus say He came to do? That would be Matthew 5:17:
17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.

Jesus fulfilled the "law and the prophets" at the cross!!!

At this point I think instead of trying to understand, you're trying to win the argument...because it's pretty clear from all that's been said...you don't want to be confused with the facts.

I'm not in the mood for you and your color-code remarks.


Have a good day.

 

[Interplanner]

Many people think the 'great and terrible day of the Lord' part has to be future but there are a couples reasons why this is not the case.