New Covenant Theology
June 11th, 2009 by Sean
After Cornelius and his group became Christians, a fresh set of questions emerged about whether or not Gentiles needed to keep the Law in order to be included in the people of God. The apostles correctly decided in the famous Jerusalem council not to put a yoke on the Gentiles that they themselves could not bear (Acts 15). Before long it became apparent that Jesus’ death had ratified the new covenant, which meant that even Jews had been freed from the letter of the Law.
Jesus had already prepared the disciples for this revelation, for the night Jesus was betrayed he entered into a new blood covenant with his disciples by offering them the cup of wine: “This cup is the new covenant in my blood…which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26.28; 1 Corinthians 11.25). As time went on, the apostles (notably Paul) came to understand that Jesus’ death, resurrection, ascension, and outpouring of the spirit brought about changes in how God related to his people. A new covenant had been established.
This covenant is a better covenant because Jesus belongs to a superior priesthood (Hebrews 7.22-24) and because he entered into the real tabernacle in heaven through his own blood (Hebrews 9.11-14) as opposed to entering into Herod’s temple through the blood of animals. By one offering, Jesus accomplished permanent sanctification for the people of God (Hebrews 10.14). Furthermore, Jesus is the mediator of a better covenant than Moses because it has been enacted on better promises (Hebrews 8.6). Here is a list of new covenant promises as described in Hebrews 8.10-12:
- I will put my laws into their minds
And I will write them on their hearts - I will be their God
And they shall be my people - Everyone will not teach his fellow citizen, saying “Know the LORD”
For all will know me from the least to the greatest - I will be merciful to their iniquities
And I will remember their sins no more
The law was written on our hearts by the Spirit, which stands in contrast to “the letter” (i.e. the letters engraved on stones, which stands for the whole Mosaic Law) (Romans 2.29; 7.6; 2 Corinthians 3.3, 6-8).
2 Corinthians 3.6-8
6 [God] has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of letter but of spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. 7 Now if the ministry of death, chiseled in letters on stone tablets, came in glory so that the people of Israel could not gaze at Moses’ face because of the glory of his face, a glory now set aside, 8 how much more will the ministry of the Spirit come in glory?
Notice how the Holy Spirit is tied to the new covenant. We will return to this connection in a short while, but for now we need to establish that the new covenant is in effect today. It is true that in the parallel passages to Jeremiah 31.31-34, the context is eschatological. But, so too are the promises about the Messiah, the resurrection, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. So, to think that the new covenant has already begun as well is not unreasonable. But, alas the author of Hebrews is not leaving anything up to inference; he (or she) states in no uncertain terms that the covenant has been brought into effect.
Hebrews 10.14-22
14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after saying, 16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds,” 17 he also adds, “I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.” 18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin. 19 Therefore, my friends, since we have confidence to enter the sanctuary by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain (that is, through his flesh), 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
Note that he focuses on promise #4: forgiveness from sin. Is there any Christian who would deny that our sins have been forgiven because of the shed blood of the Lamb of God? This blood inaugurated for us a new and living way. Our hearts have been sprinkled clean and our bodies have been washed, making us fit for relationship with God. We need not instruct one another to know God, for each one of us has been given firsthand knowledge of God through the Holy Spirit within us. Through our high priest we have permission to pass beyond the veil right into the holy of holies, where God dwells.
Ephesians 2.14-19
14 For he is our peace; in his flesh he has made both groups [Jews and Gentiles] into one and has broken down the dividing wall [the Law], that is, the hostility between us. 15 He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace, 16 and might reconcile both groups to God in one body through the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through it. 17 So he came and proclaimed peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near; 18 for through him both of us have access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God,
The people of God are one. There are not two standards: one for Jews who are bound to obey Torah and another for Gentiles who keep the Noahide laws. No, because of Jesus’ death the dividing wall has been abolished in his flesh—the Law of commandments. The new covenant makes the first obsolete (Hebrews 8.13). This cleared the way for peace between Jew and Gentile as one new humanity. Furthermore, we have not been driven farther from God because of this; rather we are now given access in one Spirit to the Father. There is no loss for the Jew either because the new covenant is superior to the old.
The new covenant is in full effect now. If it is not, then that means that we are under the old covenant (which means no eating bacon, mowing the lawn on Saturday, or wearing mixed fiber clothing). Either we relate to God through his covenant mediated by Moses or his covenant mediated by Jesus. If we are not now living under this new and living way then why does the Scripture use the present tense in referring to Jesus’ mediation of the new covenant? For it says:
Hebrews 8.6
But Jesus has now obtained a more excellent ministry, and to that degree he is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises. (emphasis added)
By the blood of the Messiah our very consciences were cleansed, for we have been redeemed from the transgressions that occurred under the first covenant, so that we who have been called would receive the promise of the kingdom inheritance (Hebrews 9.14-15). We have not come to Mount Sinai with its blazing fire and blaring trumpet, rather we have come to Mount Zion, to the general assembly of the firstborn, to God the Judge of all, and to Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant (Hebrews 12.18-24). Notice how Paul speaks on the matter:
Galatians 3.23-29
23 Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed. 24 Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. 27 As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise.
The Law brought us to Christ, but now something new has come, which erases previous distinctions. No longer are their ethnic barriers (Jew vs. Greek), class distinctions (slave vs. free man), or gender inequalities (male vs. female), for we have all been made one in the Messiah (i.e. things have changed). We have been released from the Law, since in Christ we died to it, thus we are able to serve in the newness of the Spirit rather than the oldness of the letter (Romans 7.6). In fact, the requirement of the Law is fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the spirit (Romans 8.4). Thus, the Holy Spirit does not merely empower followers of the Messiah to testify about his resurrection in word, but also by their entire lifestyle as they live out the new covenant.
Galatians 5.16-25
16 Live by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not subject to the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are obvious: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, 21 envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these. I am warning you, as I warned you before: those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 By contrast, the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, and self-control. There is no law against such things. 24 And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also be guided by the Spirit.
Morality under the new covenant, the way of Jesus, is intimately linked to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. For example, once Paul cogently concluded that in light of Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection, God’s people are no longer under the Law, he immediately stressed that this does not precipitate lawlessness. The deeds of the flesh are still marked out by the Law as sinful, and pursuing those actions will block entrance into the kingdom of God. The solution is to “walk by the spirit,” which results in the fruit of the spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. He says unequivocally, “If you are led by the spirit, you are not under the Law.”
This is why when we refer to the New Covenant, some who still hold to the Law respond that the New Covenant will only be fulfilled in the future. But as you have shown, it is enacted now.
I would like to add one clarification though. You said, “We need not instruct one another to know God, for each one of us has been given firsthand knowledge of God through the Holy Spirit within us.” However Jeremiah 31:34 says that this will affect “every man,” not just Christians in the Body of Christ: “…They shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me…” Other similar passages also describe it as something that will be worldwide when the Kingdom is inaugurated, not to mention Joel connecting the outpouring of the holy spirit with signs in the heavens of the Day of the Lord.
This has in fact been used by some to refute the idea that we are under the New Covenant now. But that would be a contradiction of the verses you referred to that state the New Covenant has been enacted. The solution is to realize that while the complete, world-wide fulfillment of this is eschatological, the New Covenant has in fact been ratified, and we are given the holy spirit as a “token” or “foretaste” of our inheritance (Eph. 1:13-14; II Cor. 1:21-22; II Cor. 5:5). We get to taste of the power to change our hearts, although we will not be perfectly transformed in this lifetime, nor is the whole world transformed yet. I wrote an article about this on my website.
Amen. Excellent work brother Sean. Many of us have been left “covenant-less” knowing we are not under the Mosaic Covenant but pushing the New Covenant to being a future thing. Certainly the fulfillment of the New Covenant is in the age to come in the sense of entering the promised land of the Kingdom of God - but certainly, as you have shown here, with the coming of the new covenant spirit, we are experiencing the new covenant now.
Mark,
I’m uncomfortable saying that the new covenant is only partially here. The conclusion that results is that we are partially under the old covenant and then we get into a lot of subjective reasoning. Also, when the Bible says “all” it doesn’t usually mean it in an absolute sense. For example the prophecy quoted on Pentecost was that the spirit would be poured out on “all” flesh. But the “all” is qualified by explaining that the spirit will be given to sons, daughters, young men, old men, slaves, and men and women. The idea is not every person on planet earth but every person within the people of God (i.e. all who call upon the name of the Lord). So it is in Jer 31/Heb 8. Those within the covenant do not need to teach each other to know God because all will know him through the access point provided by Christ:
the kingdom is not the same as the new covenant. the kingdom is primarily political and is symbolized chiefly by the visions from Daniel as a new kingdom divinely originated which will subdue all earthly kingdoms. I think of the new covenant as the way the people of God relate to him today, which includes the sacrifice of Christ, the enactment of the four new covenant promises, and the way of life enabled by the holy spirit.
On your last point, I agree that the holy spirit is the pledge. But it is not the pledge of the new covenant, rather it is the pledge of the inheritance, which is the kingdom. The spirit cannot be a pledge for the spirit, as if God gives us a drop of it now and then immerses us in it when he comes…no through one spirit we have all been baptized already (1 Cor 12.13).
Lastly, the resurrection will I think deal with a lot of the lingering “flesh” problems we fight today (or if you like to call it the nature of Adam)
All in all, I don’t think we really disagree on this stuff too much, just in the finer details
That conclusion would only result if we didn’t have the Scriptures you referred to that clearly state that the New Covenant is in effect. All I’m saying is that the ultimate fulfillment of God’s promise is still future, since (a) we still have the nature of Adam until the resurrection, and (b) we don’t see the whole world in subjection to God’s rule by the spirit.
You say the kingdom is not the same as the New Covenant. But didn’t Jesus define the purpose of the New Covenant in Luke 22:29? Remember, he said, “I appoint unto you (literally “covenant with you”) a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me (”covenanted with me”); That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
The New Covenant which Jesus ratified with his blood was for the purpose of redeeming the sins of mankind, so that “they which are called might receive the promise of eternal (aionios) inheritance” (Hebrews 9:15). The Kingdom and the New Covenant are closely linked. The whole character of the coming Kingdom will be defined by people having God’s spirit in their hearts and walking in God’s ways, as described by the Prophets. That’s why when Jesus told the Apostles they would receive the holy spirit “not many days hence” they asked, “Will you at this time restore the Kingdom to Israel?” This pouring out of the spirit was part of the prophecy of the coming Kingdom.
We can see the holy spirit poured out in our own hearts now, but we will see it dominate the world in the Kingdom. Hebrews 6:4-5 says that we “have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come.”
15 He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances;
wow what a difference in translation
both makes this whole subject mean 2 different things.
one is a lie
Mark,
The kingdom is to be identified with the new covenant in the same way that the Promised Land was identified with the old covenant. There is a nice parallel here in a sense, because the old covenant was really a constitution, the way of being the people of God in the land they were to inherit (hence all the civil laws and what not)….the new covenant is the way of being the people of God in the kingdom to come. The exciting thing is that the spirit has arrived early (cf. Acts 2) and thus, even while we exist in this tired old age of fallenness and sin, God has acted through the death of his son, through the outpouring of the holy spirit, to enable us to live the way of the future now, thus testifying to all that Jesus really is the Messiah.
i found only one close to what Sean used.
what version did that come from Sean
from what is said only the law in the ordinances of Israel was abolished , not the Commandments of God
15by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations
15by (AT)abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is (AU)the Law of commandments contained in ordinances
15He repealed the law code that had become so clogged with fine print and footnotes that it hindered more than it helped
15By abolishing in His [own crucified] flesh the enmity [caused by] the Law with its decrees and ordinances [which He annulled];
15 He did this by ending the system of law with its commandments and regulations
15 having abolished in the flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances;
15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances
15having annulled the enmity in his flesh, the law of commandments in ordinances
15 He did away with the law of the commandments in regulations,
15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations.
Hi, Sean,
I appreciate the study, but I feel it gives others an incomplete definition of the New Covenant. We are certainly under the New Covenant currently (it has began), but the primary aspect of this New Covenant is God’s laws written upon physical Israel’s hearts.
Hebrews 8:8-12 is a quotation from Jeremiah 31:31-34 (as you have noted). When Yahweh, speaking through Jeremiah, told the children of Israel this (back in Jeremiah’s day) what law do you think the Israelites were thinking about? It could be none other than the law that they were familiar with, commonly called the law of Moses. This is the context of the prophecy in Jeremiah and thus the fulfillment of the prophecy can only be found in this law of Moses being written upon the children of Israel’s hearts.
Your thoughts?
Your friend,
Matthew Janzen
I agree.
That interpretation only works if you start with the assumption that the “Commandments of God” means only the Ten Commandments and not the rest of the Law of Moses. It’s already been pointed out that there is no Scriptural basis for such an assumption, although you disagree. Let’s not go around in the same circles again.
Mark C.,
No, Christ taught the Mosaic law, but did so contrary to the “fence” and hypocrisy that was being built by some of the Rabbinic leadership of his time…
Matthew 23
1 Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, 2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; 3 therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them. 4 “They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger.
There is that pesky context again from our Messiah.
there is no Scriptual basis for your basis. there are many for the true one though.
your the one going in circles not us, i wont quit till the heaven and earth pass away. GOD IS SO WORTH THE TROUBLE!!!!!
Thanks be to God for delivering all men, both Jew and Gentile from
the yoke of the law that none of us were able to bear. Only Jesus
could have delivered us from it and only he lived the righeousness
of it to the perfect acceptance of God who is the judge of all.
No man in history has ever kept the righteousness of the law as Jesus did, nor will ever a man who came into this world after he did,
do as well as he.
Glory to God on high for bringing us into a new covenant, the new
testament in the blood of Jesus, the everlasting good news. Now
we have good news of peace to all men who will believe, which will
never wear out.
There is now no more Jew or Gentile in Jesus, for all are one, accepted by the same sacrifice which does indeed take away our
sins.
Just as men may be of one skin color or another, in Christ there is
no difference, for all are of the one blood.
The things I could never bear, God has taken away. Jesus bore it all for me.
Joseph,
Jesus’ point in that passage was that the Pharisees were hypocrites, and that while under the law, one should follow what they said more than what they did. He was speaking to people under the law, since he had not yet completed his sacrifice and ratified the New Covenant. But he said he had greater things to teach them that they couldn’t understand yet. Those greater things he revealed through the Apostle Paul and the other New Testament writers, from whom we have learned about the difference between the Old and New Covenants.
There is that pesky broader context from the whole New Testament again (by revelation from our Messiah).
Along the lines of your #2 post, Victor, I was reading from The Pilgrim’s Progress, and as I did, I was seeing indications that
Christian was already in Zion, as he so desired Zion which was yet so far ahead. The glory of it was ever in front of him as it was his heart’s
desire. The sights of it that he saw, kept him going on.
Robert,
The two scriptures you mention in your #5 post seem to say the
same thing. I see no disagreement between them, though they
say what they say slightly differently. I wonder if reading the verses
that preceed or follow them would help clarify.
I often wonder why you always see disagreement.
Mark C,
It’s not that hard…
What did the Rabbinic say?
What did Christ tell them do to in reference to what they said?
Firstly, the context is clear, I don’t need you to tell me that Christ didn’t really mean what he said. If you do believe that what Messiah said is no longer relevant because of his death on the cross, then back it up with words from the Messiah himself.
Second, What does salvation have to do with this passage? Christ never told his disciples that after his death on the cross that they should wipe what he said in Matthew 23. No, he meant every word of what he said. And as far as Matthew 23 goes it contradicts your assertion that Christ didn’t advocate the law in being part the “Mosaic law.” No way around this one buddy.
I won’t buy into it. No way the Messiah is all of a sudden one day going to tell us to obey the law from the seat of Moses, and that he doesn’t change one iota of the law, and then the next day we do the opposite. Sorry, you are missing the context, so now you have to revert to Paul’s letters to a certain people of a certain times to justify your doctrine. I’m old school, that doesn’t mean I’m not leaning the new, I have both as intended by our Messiah, and what will be required in the Kingdom come.
Another interesting note of context of Matthew 23. Christ begins his 8 woes to the Rabbinic, notice what he says in the bold…
27 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which on the outside appear beautiful, but inside they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness. 28 “So you, too, outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
The Pharisees? Laweless? How could Christ say such a thing? Oh, that’s right, because they were not obeying the law as Christ said they should by the seat of MOSES (Mosaic law). Instead, they became hypocrites, building their own law and fence around the law of Moses and boasting themselves up bases upon this “fence” they had built.
Sean,
I find myself stumbling over one statement which is this:
“By one offering, Jesus accomplished permanent sanctification for the people of God.”
Here’s what Hebrews 10:14 says in the 1599 Geneva:
14 For with one offering hath he consecrated forever them that are
sanctified.
When I read of “them that are sanctified”, I think of people being
presently in the santification process, or am I thinking of that wrong?
Q. Is our sanctification a process?
I see a few different ways the word sanctify is used in my Webster’s dictionary.
Maybe that’s the reason I was stumbling. According to my dictionary, Sanctify (Santification isn’t in my dictionary, but I think
it is a legitimate word) means 1- to make holy, to set apart as holy;
consecrate, 2- to make free from sin; purify, 3- to make binding
or irviolable {whatever that is-Ray} by a religious sanction, 3-
to make productive of spiritual blessing. {OK now I see sanctification, it’s the noun form listed here at the end}
So our sanctification is a process. It is also something Jesus does
for us. It’s also something he did, for he made something binding,
maybe even irviolable, if I knew what it was, by God’s sanction, or
…….authorized approval. Thanks be to God for my dictionary.
I think I see now what you are saying Sean. You see my stumbling.
Please remember it when you come across that word again. I ask
this because there may be others like me.
I see you connecting lots of scripture together, helping others see
the kingdom in greater clarity.
Continue on, in Jesus’ name. I plan to do the same.
Joseph
I have only one problem with your perception, If we are still held by the law of Moses how are we to do the punishment.Now if you are saying that the punishment is no longer mans than yes it is still moral to do what God Gave Israel but God has the only Judgement in them. Now the morals of the law came from the 10 Commandments and under no circumstance did Jesus remove us from them. But how we do them will count toward our greatness in the kingdom.
when Jesus Comes to reestablish Israel He will rule with whatever laws he wants, if its the whole torah will be up to Him and God
I didn’t say that. The fact that things changed with the New Covenant in no way implies that he “didn’t mean” what he said under the Old Covenant.
We’ve been doing that. These truths are declared in many parts of the New Testament which were written by revelation of Jesus Christ. It comes back to that again.
Who said anything about salvation?
He never said they should “wipe” it, but he did say that we are no longer under the Old Covenant. And as I said, that doesn’t imply that he “didn’t mean” what he said before. It applied under the Old Covenant, but things are different under the New. Paul’s epistles are more than just pastoral advice about certain circumstances. He gives a lot of revelation about the New Covenant, as do the other NT writers, especially in Hebrews.
Not sure what you are saying here. What do you mean by “Christ didn’t advocate the law being in part the “Mosaic Law”?
I’m not suggesting he said to “do the opposite.” He said we fulfill the law by the spirit so we don’t need to be in bondage to the letter of the law. That’s not opposite.
As I have said, Paul’s epistles are not just to “a certain people of a certain times” with no relevance to the Church at large. He claims to be sent by Jesus, to be speaking for Jesus, and to have gotten revelation from Jesus. This is the crux of the issue, I believe.
And as Sean has demonstrated, the Kingdom will be characterized by people who walk by the holy spirit, not judgment according to the letter of the law.
I heartily recommend you do some searching with regard to the writings of Paul. Check out the views of others who interpret them the way we do, and balance it with what you have been taught. Consider it carefully with prayer, and ask God to show you.
About sanctification and such. This has been coming into view, but
I’m not sure I see this very clearly yet. It’s about becoming holy
for the Lord’s use.
I saw the word “Inviolable” connected with such words as sacred,
and indestructable.
How does this relate to the people of God as they become holy?
It’s as if we will become the weapons, the armor of God, if we will
become holy. We then should become indestructable. O to God that
this our fate be sealed.
from post #16
The two scriptures you mention in your #5 post seem to say the
same thing. I see no disagreement between them, though they
say what they say slightly differently
law with its commandments and ordinances
even the law of commandments contained in ordinances;
Ray
one refers to 1 thing being in the other while the other verse refers to 2 separate things.
they dont say or mean the same
Whether he “has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances” or he “abolished … the law of commandments contained in ordinances” makes no significant difference, when you see that these terms are used largely interchangeably. It only makes a difference if you start with the assumption that the commandments are different from the ordinances, or the law is different from the commandments. And you have yet to present any solid evidence that there is a difference, nor have you addressed the Scriptural evidence we have presented that there is no difference. But either way, Jesus abolished the enmity between Jews and Gentiles, because he made the Old Covenant obsolete.
Mark C.,
Interesting that Sean only pointed out Jeremiah? Also given the point that Matthew brought up in post #8 regarding Jeremiah.
The apostles were to declare Yeshua to the nations (Matt. 10:18, 24:14) which were up to then being judged according to the conscience laws written on their hearts (Rom. 2:6-16). There is coming a time however when the entire world will hear of the Torah:
Isa 2:2-5
[2] And it shall be in the last days, the mountain of the house of Jehovah shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow into it.
[3] And many people shall go and say, Come and let us go up to the mount of Jehovah, to the house of the God of Jacob. And He will teach from His ways, and we will walk in His paths. For out of Zion the Law (TORAH) will go forth, and the Word of Jehovah from Jerusalem.
[4] And He shall judge among the nations and shall rebuke many people. And they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, nor shall they learn war any more.
[5] Oh house of Jacob, come and let us walk in the light of Jehovah.
but first a warning will be issued:
Rev 14:6-7
[6] And I saw another angel flying in mid-heaven, having an everlasting gospel to proclaim to those dwelling on the earth, even to every nation and tribe and tongue and people,
[7] saying in a great voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him, because the hour of His judgment has come; also, Worship “Him who has made the heaven, and the earth, and the sea,” and the springs of waters. Ex. 20:11
After this and some things, The third temple will be rebuilt and the Torah will be kept according to Ezekiel chapters 40-47. At this same time the new covenant will be completely fulfilled (brought to a fullness) and we will eat the Passover lamb with him again as Yeshua said in Luke 22:15-16. That is, the kingdom of GOD will have arrived on earth.
The New Covenant, which is the Torah being written on our hearts according to Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 20:34-42, 36:24-27, 37:21-28, will cause us to all walk in the statutes of GOD and His ways that had been previously broken. You know, stuff like Sabbaths, new moons, feasts etc. And that is why Ezekiel goes on to describe that magnificent temple that will arrive from heaven, but most interestingly he describes the Torah ceremonies that will go on during that time:
Eze 45:21-25
[21] In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, the Passover shall be to you, a feast of seven days, unleavened bread is eaten.
[22] And the prince shall make ready on that day for himself and for the people of the land, a bull for a sin offering.
[23] And seven days of the feast he shall make ready a burnt offering to Jehovah, seven bulls and seven rams, without blemish, daily for the seven days, and for a sin offering a kid of the he-goats daily.
[24] And a food offering of an ephah for a bull, and an ephah for a ram, he shall make ready; also of oil, a hin for an ephah.
[25] In the seventh month, in the fifteenth day of the month, at the feast, he shall make ready like these seven days as the sin offering, as the burnt offering, as the food offering, and as the oil.
Zechariah relates to the gentile nations and one of their roles:
Zec 14:16-21
[16] And it shall be, everyone who is left from all the nations which came up against Jerusalem shall go up from year to year to worship the King, Jehovah of Hosts, and to keep the Feast of Tabernacles.
[23] So says Jehovah of Hosts: In those days ten men out of all languages of the nations shall take hold, and will seize the tzitzit of a man, a Jew, saying, Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.
To which Isaiah relates:
Isa 66:21-23
[21] And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the LORD.
[22] For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
[23] And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
Some more prophecy about gentiles taking to themselves the Torah:
[6] And the sons of the alien who join themselves on Jehovah to serve Him, and to love the name of Jehovah, to be His servants, everyone who keeps from defiling the sabbath, and takes hold of My covenant:
[7] even them I will bring to My holy mount and make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted on My altar, for My house shall be called a house of prayer for all the peoples,
The TORAH ain’t gone anywhere nor will it. And that is precisely why you never see a prophesy of it disappearing in the OT… ONE A SINGLE PROPHECY. In fact quite the opposite:
Isa 8:16, 20
[16] Bind up the testimony, Seal the Torah among My disciples.
[20] To the Torah and to the testimony! If not, let them say after this manner, `That there is no dawn to it.’
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations (GENTILES and tribes scattered which are in covenant to keep Torah anyway), baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all (Torah) that I commanded you (Torah); and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
[Mat 28:18-20]
The Tenach (OT) is quite clear about Torah - it doesn’t end. So is the Messiah (Matt. 5:17-19)
I have studied both sides of the argument, I suggest you take an approach coming from the 1st century and hold Paul’s writings up to the rest of the NT and OT writers and then see what the context brings you. I don’t believe I have all the truth, but I do know that the Trinity is a false doctrine and I do believe that even though faith in our Creator can offer us salvation, it does not do away with the law that Messiah obeyed and the law that we will abide by in the Kingdom.
So, if you want to judge me based upon my obedience to the law as Christ reiterated, then so be it.
Mark C.,
What’s all that business about being grafted in then? There is no such thing as Old covenant as “obsolete” in Scripture. These is your own interpretation.
texas 2 step
One states there was commandments in the ordinances which is where you misunderstand everything.
what moves you have
Robert,
How the law is carried out today has much to do with the authority to be able to carry out punishment. Here is a tidbit I found, I recommend searching into this further, good study…
As a practical matter, the Laws also may be classified in line with how they might be implemented after the destruction of the Temple. Some mitzvot (Laws) are relevant only in the Land of Israel. Many laws pertaining to holiness and purity can no longer be performed, absent the holy Sanctuary in Jerusalem. Some laws require a kind of beit din (Jewish court) that no longer exists.
In earlier days, when Jews had a functioning court system (the beth din and the Sanhedrin high court), courts were empowered to administer physical punishments for various violations. Since the fall of the Temple, executions have been forbidden.
As far as Kingdom rule and what scripture tells us, read my post #25.
you answered my question, was only interested in your opinion so i could understand where you were coming from.
thank you
you need to be clear on this because others think that what is meant.
you need to be clear on this because others think that(not) what is meant.
we need an edit button, or atleast i do
Ezekiel 11:19
I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them
an heart of flesh;
Isn’t this a prophecy about Jesus?
Ezekiel 11:20
That they may walk in my statutes, and keep my ordinances, and do them: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God.
Didn’t Jesus do these things by the spirit of God?
Ezekiel 11:21
But as for them whose heart walketh after the heart of their detestable things and their abominations, I will recompense their
way upon their own heads, saith the Lord God.
Didn’t Jesus show that to the Pharisees of his time, in the days of
his flesh? Whenever the Pharisees (or anyone else for that matter)
walked according to the deceitfulness of the corruption which was
in them, while they communicated with Jesus, didn’t we see this
scripture of Ez 11:21 fulfilled at least in part?
And isn’t all of this that we see from Ezekiel here, like the prophecies of Jeremiah in his chapter 31:31-34?
As far as the part about they shall say no more “Know the Lord;
for they shall all know me, from the least unto the greatest..”
we have not yet seen the complete fulfillment of it yet, have we?
Yet every man may know the Lord. When he was raised up on the
cross, it was then that they knew, for they beat their chests in
self-condemnation at what they had done. It was then that they
knew they had killed the Son of God. I wonder, were they surprised
then that they had done it? So many times men get blinded by darkness.
Ezekiel 36:26
A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh.
That’s very similar to Ezekiel 11:19 which we have seen to have been about the ministry and accomplished work of Christ.
Jesus showed them plenty about how to walk in the statutes of
God and keep his judgments in his sermon from the mount. It was
by a new and better way through the spirit of the living God.
Zechariah 7:12
Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest they should
hear the law, and the words which the Lord of hosts hath sent in his spirit, by the former prophets: therefore came a great wrath from the Lord of hosts.
So we see that some did not enter in because of their stony hearts.
O how they could have set many free from the captivity of sin, setting the oppressed free from the oppressors! But they didn’t want to execute true judgment, show mercy and compassion (Zech
7:9) and so the anger of the Lord came upon them. Yet, God sent
Jesus to deliver them.
O how they thought they were keeping the commandments of God!
They didn’t really know what they were doing, did they? There was
a great darkness upon them, upon their hearts.
II Cor 3:3 is what God was after.
Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ
ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
That’s the good news God wanted people to walk in and so they
did because of Jesus. Still, they too fell short. They fell into sin too
didn’t they? But the scriptures became fullfilled by Christ, at least
in part. Jesus did his all. He didn’t fall short. It’s up to us now isn’t
it?
But wasn’t all this what the prophet Jeremiah spoke of in 31:31?
I suppose some people thought that when the Messiah would come that he would immediately see to it that all the old covenant
laws were executed by the letter, right? Well, many people missed
him when he came.
God told them about the new thing. It was written in the law, but
I don’t think many heard it. Do you? Yet, God has promised that
all Israel shall be saved. Somehow they will enter into Christ the
same way the Gentiles did, by faith in Christ, trusting him more than their understanding of the law. They will learn to lean on him
more than on their own understanding, or they won’t be saved.
Yet I trust God is able to save. We haven’t really seen the
deliverer come out of Zion yet.
Do your really not know, or are you making a point?
The Law was what separated Jews and Gentiles, and that enmity has been abolished, as Ephesians 2 tells us. Gentiles are grafted in, according to Romans 11, so now Jews and Gentiles can be part of one Body, the Church, as it says in several places.
Have you never read Hebrews?
Sean said there were other parallel passages that said similar things.
The point in post #8:
This goes back to the subject of my article, that not every reference to “God’s Law” automatically means the Law that came through Moses. In fact it couldn’t meant that in Jer. 31, since God had just said that Israel had not kept the Old Covenant, and therefore He was going to make a New Covenant.
All of the OT quotes you refer to are in the context of things that were spoken to those under the Law. They cannot be used to prove that things have not changed under the New Covenant, since the New Covenant had not been enacted yet. If you keep reading “Torah” into the verses that mention what Jesus taught in the Gospels, you are missing Messiah’s point.
*SIGH* Do I really have to say this again? Nobody is saying the Torah is GONE. It is fulfilled… Please reread all the former posts and articles and instead of arguing your viewpoint, really try to see where we’re coming from, because you are not getting it.
I dealt with this before. You never see a prophecy in the OT about the LETTER of the Law being made obsolete because it was hidden. It was not understood that a new way of life based on the spirit instead of the letter would render the Old Covenant obsolete, nor was it understood that the division between Jew and Gentile (based on the Law) would be done away with. These are called mysteries in the NT and they were revealed in their fullest form to Paul.
That’s what Sean and I (and others here) have been doing. But you continue to miss it because you focus on the OT and don’t understand what Paul wrote. You say you have studied it, but with all due respect, many of your questions reflect a lack of understanding of what we are claiming Paul said. You have been trying to refute points which we are not making (such as the Law being “gone”) and not really getting what we’re saying.
Nobody’s judging you on anything.
First of all, let’s try to refrain from name calling; it’s unnecessary, especially considering how you have reacted to things I’ve said which you construed as “personal attacks.”
Secondly, if “one states there was commandments in the ordinances” then that means the ordinances contain commandments. On the other hand if the other version refers to “the law with its ordinances,” that says that the ordinances are with the law. Neither wording supports your claim that the Ten Commandments and the Law of Moses are two separate things.
So either way, whether it’s talking about commandments in the ordinances, or commandments with the ordinances, it is still saying that the division between Jews and Gentiles based on the commandments and the ordinances has been abolished.
Matthew,
Indeed, if we did not take into account Hebrews, Galatians, Romans, or Ephesians, we would be left with thinking that one day God would write Torah on everyone’s heart. However, Hebrews makes the point that the sacrificial system has ended and thus there has been a change in Torah. Furthermore, in Galatians it says that if we walk by the spirit we are no longer under Torah (and that circumcision is no longer required). Furthermore, for Gentiles keeping Torah was never an issue for us anyhow (cf. Jerusalem Council in Acts 15). So, I want to affirm that God’s law is written in our hearts via the spirit (cf. fruit of the spirit) but it is a modified law, a law summed up with the commands to love God and others as Jesus did, not the full civil law (i.e. stoning of homosexuals and adulterers) nor the food laws (no eating pork, etc.), nor the sacrificial system, nor the observation of holidays (cf. Col 2.16). Of course if someone wants to observe these laws that is fine, but the moment he imposes them on everyone else and says, “unless you keep the whole Torah you are disobeying God” then we have a problem. Freedom belongs to us in Christ.
If you don’t think Jesus changed the interpretation of Torah (and that is always what Second Temple Judaism is talking about when it talks about Torah), and instead only lean on Paul for that - I think you are missing a huge part of the puzzle. Part of being a “good Jew” as Jesus was is thinking about and developing an interpretation of Torah for your life (and in most cases that follows the orthodoxy of the time, though not in our case).
sure, Jesus was working within Torah-observant judaism, which is what we would expect for someone living under the old covenant….but today we lift post-new-covenant ratification….for Moses it was no issue to work on Saturday for the first 80 years of his life, but once God’s law came he would need to keep Shabbat
Psalm 104:24-28
O Lord, how manifold are they works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches.
So is the great and wide sea, wherein are things creeping innumerable, both small and great beasts.
There go the ships: there is that leviathan, whom thou hast made to play therein.
These wait upon thee: that thou mayest give them their meat in due season.
That thou givest them they gather: thou openest thine hand, they are filled with good.
Ray,
what does quoting those verses have to do with anything?
Psalm 104:24-28 are wonderful verses giving praise to the Lord
whose works are all around us. The earth and even things of it are
filled with his word which he has inhabited. Very deep and wide are
the great things of the deep which the spirit he has given us is known to search out. Within the deep things of God there are treasures yet undiscovered by us. In the deep there is also trouble
as troubled waters come to those who go out to venture in the sea. Yet all of us do wait upon the Lord that he may give us something to eat to sustain us in due season. By his hand we are
fed and by his hand we gather it. This is a great mystery and it is
of God.
Hi, Sean,
Neither Hebrews, Galatians, Romans, or Ephesians teaches us to disobey the Torah. If Paul (the sure author of 3 out of 4 of the above letters) was a true Apostle (and I believe he was) he had to speak according to the law and the testimony (Isaiah 8:20) or else there would be no light in him. He would be a false prophet according to Deut. 13:1-5 if he taught against the dietary laws or circumcision or any other aspect of the Torah.
There would only be one law that was in view when Jeremiah 31:31-34 was spoken to those Israelites back in Jeremiah’s day. It was that law that God would one day write upon their hearts.
Hebrews speaks of a change or more properly transferrance of the law in regards to the priesthood. Yeshua is not a Levite priest, but rather a Melchisedec priest. This is entirely permissible to Torah, seeing that Melchesedec was a priest of the Most High God before Levi ever came into existence.
When Galatians says if we live by the spirit we are no longer under the Torah it means that a spirit led life will observe the Torah. A flesh led life will break the commandments of God. Notice the two parallel verses:
Gal. 5:16 - “I say then, walk by the Spirit and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.”
Gal. 5:18 - “But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law.”
Not carrying out fleshly desires equals not under the law.
The Jerusalem council in Acts 15 was a matter of keeping the law for salvation or justification. Some rose up and said that the Gentiles could not be saved without first keeping the law. The council was not about Gentiles keeping the law as a way of life. If that were the case why “impose” upon them four necessary things that are taken right out of the Torah (Acts 15:20)? Is James saying here that salvation depends upon faith in Messiah plus these four necessary things? No, he is simply making the point that after salvation one must strive to live a holy life and that holiness is laid out in the Torah. The Gentiles would eventually learn the rest of the law seeing that Moses was read in the synagogues every Sabbath day (Acts 15:21).
We cannot just begin taking things out like civil laws or dietary laws or the observance of holydays. All of this is surely at least jots and tittles of the law, and Yeshua said he did not come to destroy any of it. All of it is wonderful, and is not a burden, but rather freedom. The Psalmist said he would walk at liberty for he sought God’s precepts (Psalm 119:45). So there is freedom in all of God’s law, even laws that pertain to diet and worship days.
People tend to have a backwards concept of the law of Moses and this does not stem from Bible study, but rather from taking others words about the law as truth without research. The law was never looked upon by OT Saints as something rigorous, burdensome, or a yoke. It was always looked upon as freedom, liberty, etc. At the same time, even the OT Saints recognized that they could not be justified by the law. This is why David said in Psalm 143:2 - “Do not bring Your servant into judgment, for no one alive is righteous in Your sight.” They recognized then that it was only by grace through faith that a man could be declared innocent in God’s court. None of this meant that the law was abolished or that certain parts were not obligatory. We keep God’s commandments out of a love for Him and our fellow man.
Thanks for discussing Sean,
Matthew
(I trust I can have a more intelligent discussion here than what the other thread degenerated into.)
Nobody said they did. They explain how faith is above the Law and love fulfills the Torah.
Isaiah 8:
19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?
20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
Verse 20 is referring to those that say, “Seek unto them that have familiar spirits,” according to the previous verse. It doesn’t say that anyone who ever says anything that is not in the Torah has no light in them. If it did, then it be against things that even Jesus himself said. And Deut. 13:1-5 is talking about false prophets who try to lead the people to worship false gods, which Paul doesn’t do.
If the ideas of righteousness without the law, and Gentiles being fellow heirs, were hidden and not revealed in the OT, the only way they can be known is by revelation from God, which is how Paul says he got his gospel (Gal. 1:11-12). Notice he refers to the message (gospel) that he preached, not just the pastoral advice he gives in his epistles.
This goes back to the subject of the other article, New Covenant Commandments, namely, that not every reference to God’s Law automatically refers to the Law that was delivered on Mt. Sinai.
It doesn’t say a spirit led life will “observe the Torah” in the sense of keeping the letter of the Law. It says that one walking by the spirit will not fulfill the desire of the flesh, and also (in v. 14, as well as Rom. 13:8,10 & James 2:8) that love fulfills the law.
No, he is making the point that after salvation one must strive to live a holy life, but those four things were necessary to keep the peace.
The only way to arrive at the conclusion that the Gentiles would learn to keep the rest of the Law from Acts 15:21 is to read that into it. It doesn’t say that, and many other NT Scriptures teach that faith is superior to the law. As Paul says in Gal. 3:2-5, if we are set free by grace through faith, why go back under the letter of the law?
I agree. And to say the “ceremonial” laws, and the sacrifices are done away with, but not the “civil laws or dietary laws or the observance of holydays” is doing just that. We can’t pick and choose which parts we should still keep and which parts we don’t. We obey the commandments of the New Covenant. Some of the “morals” of the New Covenant are the same as the Old, but there are other significant differences. That’s why we must let the words of our Lord guide us, and not the words of Moses.
It was freedom to those who were under the Law, if they were demonstrating their faith in God, especially where the foreshadows of the ultimate sacrifice were concerned. But Paul calls it a burden and even a curse, because by the works of the Law no flesh can be justified. The Law was wonderful as long people kept it. But the problem is, nobody could keep it fully. That’s why it has to be by grace through faith, and not by works. And yes, that is talking about salvation. But again, if you are saved by faith, why would you want to go back to the letter of the law?
We should keep the commandments that GOD wants us to keep, if we love Him, and that means the commandments of Jesus, not those of Moses. He is the ultimate prophet that Moses himself foretold. It is HIS words that we are to obey. And as we have said before, his words have been communicated to us not only in the four Gospels, but also in the gospel message which Paul preached “by revelation of Jesus Christ.”
BTW, if you haven’t checked it out yet, I recommend the class on Hebrews that is here on this site:
http://www.kingdomready.org/hebrews_class.php
that is correct.
who says obey the torah, they are not the 10 commandments, the 10 are a separate book within the old testament, wrote in stone.
here is your curse , your old covenant, your mosaic law all part of the covenant at Moab
Deuteronomy 29
21 And the Lord shall separate him unto evil out of all the tribes of Israel, according to all the curses of the covenant that are written in this book of the law:
while everthing is true that you say about being under the law in NT you dont understand what it applies too and probably never will.
dont have need to read the rest of what you write
Robert,
I can’t tell you not to post, but I can ask you not to degenerate this thread like you did the others.
No you cant, and you cant make reference’s to me like that either. if it was me that said that i would get warned.
as long as you post things i dont agree with i will be there just as you do to all. i ask you once not to try to belittle me but you kept on. so i have accepted you are just that way and decided to deal with it anyway.
so buck up and take your beaten without questionable comments
We will NOT go down this road again. Henceforth you will be IGNORED.
(I trust I can have a more intelligent discussion here than what the other thread degenerated into.)
well thats up in the air because whereever you go, there you are, but Sean and Matthew will help bring up the bar
Hi, Mark,
I do not have alot of time this morning, but here is a reply to your first three statements. I will reply to the others when time permits.
1. Faith has always been a weighty matter of the law (Mt. 23:23), and faith was how our father Abraham was declared to be righteous (Gen. 15:1-6).
Likewise, love has always been the fulfilling of the Torah. Deut. 6:5-6 teaches us to love Yahweh with everything. It’s the first and greatest commandment in the Torah. The text also says that these words should be upon our hearts. This was true even then in the day of Moses, but so many people tend to think of Moses’ day as some kind of harsh, no love, faithless day.
2. I believe you have misrepresented Scripture (Isaiah 8:20) here Mark. I agree with you that in the immediate context the passage (Isa. 8:20) is speaking against those mentioned in verse 19. The next verse is a basic principle statement. The reason that Israel was not to seek these type people is because of what verse 20 and the rest of the Tanak teaches. People that do not speak according to God’s law have no light in them. The passage has just as much relevance to anybody else then or now that speaks contrary to the law and the testimony.
Also, Yeshua (Jesus) never spoke contrary to the law and the testimony. He said in the plainest words possible that we shouldn’t even think he came to destroy the law or the prophets. Yet this is precisely what the majority of professing Christians think he did when they say things like “Jesus fulfilled the law.” In their minds this means that we do not have to keep the law anymore. Yet in the very same breath, Yeshua tells us that the Torah he didn’t come to destroy must be fulfilled by his followers - even on the minute level, Mt. 5:19-20.
3. Deut. 13:1-5 is speaking of false prophets who try to persuade people to worship other gods than Yahweh, but this is in context of persuading people against the Torah. Look at verses 3-5. “Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or unto that dreamer of dreams: for Yahweh your God proveth you, to know whether ye love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Ye shall walk after Yahweh your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death, because he hath spoken rebellion against Yahweh your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed thee out of the house of bondage, to draw thee aside out of the way which Yahweh thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put away the evil from the midst of thee.” The context is that any prophet who seeks to turn you away from the commandments of Yahweh (obviously the Torah is being spoken of) is a false prophet. This would include violation of the first command (no gods besides Yahweh) but also violation of any other command in the Torah.
Good day to you,
Matthew
Matthew,
I haven’t misrepresented Scripture. I was just showing how the passages you referred to don’t prove that Paul would have to speak according to the Law in order to be a true apostle. You said, “The passage has just as much relevance to anybody else then or now that speaks contrary to the law and the testimony.” That’s true. I wasn’t suggesting it wasn’t relevant. I was merely saying that since there were things that were hidden before and later revealed, that the person revealing them would of necessity have to speak things that were not in the Law. Moses foretold of the ultimate prophet who would speak all of God’s words. Jesus was that prophet, and he revealed things that were not revealed in the Tanakh. Some he revealed directly, others he revealed through Paul and the other NT writers. One paragraph from my post bears repeating:
Mark C.,
Please expand on these “things” as Christ seems to be disagreeing with you…
Mat 23:2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat:
Mat 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
Hmm,
Joseph,
As I’ve said before, in verses like Matt. 223:2-3, Jesus spoke to people who were still under the Mosaic Law, as he hadn’t yet completed his sacrificial work. Many of the things he taught, however, involved details added to what had been prophesied about the Messiah and the coming Kingdom. These included the necessity of Messiah dying as our perfect sacrifice and rising to conquer death. They also included the fact that there would be an interim period before beginning to reign, during which the message of the Kingdom would be preached to all the world. The children of the Kingdom would live side by side with the children of the wicked one during that time, and anyone - Jew or Gentile - can become an heir of the Kingdom because of the shed blood of Jesus. Also, as a result of Jesus ratifying the New Covenant, we are saved from the curse of the Law. Jesus revealed these things both directly and through Paul and the other New Testament writers.
Really, the book of Hebrews helps to clarify the change that took place because of Jesus’ death.
Mark,
Would you agree that epistles like Galatians and Romans deal with the issue of Judaizers who are trying to get Gentile Christians to keep the Law of Moses where as Hebrews is trying to get Jewish Christians not to go back (forsake Jesus) and return to keeping the Law of Moses?
Sean,
I agree Galatians addresses the issue of Law vs. faith from the Gentiles’ perspective, while Hebrews deals with it from the Jews’ perspective. However, it seems as if Romans kind of deals with both Jews and Gentiles. For example, in the first couple of chapters, it contrasts the Jews and Gentiles and concludes that we are ALL under sin, and need righteousness without the Law. In chapters 9-11, it deals with how the Gentiles get grafted onto the olive tree of faith after unbelieving Jews are cut off, and how Jews can get grafted on again if they accept Christ. But I do agree that, in general, Paul’s church epistles focus more on the Gentiles’ point of view while Hebrews focuses more on the Jews’ perspective.
Mark,
Thanks for that clarification. I think you are right about Romans.
I’m one that believes Paul is the writer of Hebrews, and found it interesting to see how Paul writes to those Hebrew strangers
(Pilgrims) scattered abroad, from one who was a Hebrew of Hebrews.
Paul’s other letters were to the gentile church, and so he speaks
in such a manner. Now in Hebrews (if we accept that he is the writer of it) he writes to another group.
It’s the same gospel from somewhat different perspectives at times
than I have seen in his other writings to the church.
I wonder if it was written toward the end of his ministry. He was sent to the gentiles, but just as Jesus was sent to the Jew first, he
also minstered the word to and healed gentiles.
Romans 1-3,
Separated for the gospel, Paul was called to be
Preacher of it, and it’s mystery
He meant to come to Rome, for some kind of gift
Debter to all, not ashamed, by faith a life to live
How God was made known to those who worshiped him
And how they fell away, all because of sin
Now we’ve no excuse, we who judge by man
If in the thing we do, we’re condemned by sin
Jew and Gentile alike, are we not under the same
Whether be for judgment, or whether be for grace
What advantage then the Jew, given the things of God
All have fallen into sin, seemed to lost whate’re we got
The deeds of the law we did not do, some found a gift by faith
A righteousness that was given by God, found by just a few
By faith therefore, we do conclude, a justification by grace.
All of this because of Jesus, whom we will see face to face.
Mark C. and Sean,
I’ll leave you with some passages where Paul is clearly keeping the Mo’adim after the cross.
Shabbat Shalom
He continued to follow the Levitical feast day of Unleavened Bread:
Acts 20:6 - And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we abode seven days.
He kept and encouraged others to keep Passover:
Cor. 5:8 - Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
He continued to follow the Levitical feast day of Shavuot (Pentecost):
Acts 20:16 - For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hasted, if it were possible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost.
1 Corinthians 16:8 - But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.
He kept Yom Kippur (this is the fast mentioned in the following verse):
Acts 27:9 - Now when much time was spent, and when sailing was now dangerous, because the fast was now already past, Paul admonished them,
He proved he did not teach against Torah by taking a NAZIRITE vow [which includes that act of sacrifice]:
Acts 18:18 - And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow.
Acts 21:21-26 -And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them.
He cited his continued Torah observance in his defense before a Roman governor:
Acts 24:14-17 - But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust. And herein do I exercise myself, to have always a conscience void to offence toward God, and toward men. Now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings.
And again to another Roman governor:
Acts 24:14-17 - While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.
And to a Jewish audience:
Acts 28:17 - And it came to pass, that after three days Paul called the chief of the Jews together: and when they were come together, he said unto them, Men and brethren, though I have committed nothing against the people, or customs of our fathers, yet was I delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans.
Some people like to find everything Paul did to paint him in a false
light. They do it to lead people off the right way. Those that follow
God won’t follow them.
Ray
nobody is painting a false Paul, these are the words spoken by Paul which are ignored by the ones who deny the Word of God who have the doctrine of satan.
anyone who cant understand these simple words is either decieved or is a deciever
what law in the NT commands women to be silent and why would Paul push the observance of it.
1 Corinthians 14
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Robert,
what law in the NT commands women to be silent and why would Paul push the observance of it.
Good point. This is what I have been exposing. We need to be careful and interpret as so to not make Paul into a advocate against his own actions, and not simply pick and choose.
Paul never contradicts himself only people who interpret things they do not understand or do understand but chose to decieve others for their own glory.
as i said a hundred times here, let whats clear define what you dont understand
Joseph,
Two good sources on this very site are the Hebrews class, and Dustin’s series on Romans. Have you listened to either of them?
I was listening to Derek Lehman’s (a Law abiding Messianic Jew) podcast on Jesus’ statement that the Pharisees sit in Moses’ place - something that was discusses here as well, so I thought it might be interesting to hear the opinion of other Jews as well, ones who don’t advocate the keeping of the whole Law by Gentiles (not that I want to restart this thread, I’m certain of my bible guided position on this matter). See here: http://derekleman.com/Derek_Leman/Podcast/Entries/2009/8/13_Puzzling_Pharisee_Statement.html