Messianic Christians?

[KohenMatt]

so we WILL be under the law again?? what happens if we break any of the laws of moses?

Christians shouldn't be "under" the law again in regards to salvation. Sadly, many try to achieve that, however.

There is nothing wrong with doing many of the things found in the Law, even if they are done imperfectly. Perfect obedience to the Law was never required of by God to earn salvation.

I do believe that there will be a time when there will be a new temple and sacrifices, etc. And I pray that the number of people who will be mislead by it will be few.

 

[Elin]

The Abrahamic Covenant is to the physical line of Abraham thru Isaac thru Jacob for all who believe in that ancestry...the Jews.
The New Covenant includes Jewish believers in Messiah but thru a temporary phase of unbelief also to Gentiles and is based on Jer 31...

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

The Gentiles partake of the spiritual blessings but not the land/physical. promises.

Remembering that the land promise has been fulfilled (Josh 21:43-45; 1Kgs 4:21, 24-25),
and the restoration has been accomplished in their return from captivity in Babylon, the rebuilding
of the walls and the Temple (Ne 12:43).

Scripture reports the promises to the nation of Israel have been fulfilled.

 

[Elin]

Here is a decent rundown on the Millennium Kingdom...

Premillennialism in the Old Testament, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum

It sure would help if the apostles taught such a doctrine in the NT epistles.

Did they not know about it? Did they not understand prophetic riddles in the same way?

Nor do the creeds of the early church reflect any such apostolic teaching.

In fact, it's not found in church history until the last 150 years, making it a new and novel doctrine.

I'm thinking it is the novelty of it that is so appealing.

 

[Elin]

The term "Messianic Christians" is a misnomer. Messiah is the Hebrew word for Christ. It's like saying "Christian Christians". Jews who are believers in the Messiah are members of the body of Messiah/Christ (the Church). They partake of the "spiritual" blessings of the Abrahamic and New Covenant.

Are there physical blessings of the New Covenant?

Where are they found?

 

[Elin]

ty. so the abrahamic covenant is not the same as the new covenant you posted above.

time to go to work, but i will read up on the abrahamic covenant. is there a good article or two to help me understand it better? and where exactly is it in the old testament (like, in more than one place. can i read about the whole covenant in one place or is it in many places?). and where is it in the new testament, since i know it a lot better than the old?

this part i don't understand

The New Covenant includes Jewish believers in Messiah but thru a temporary phase of unbelief also to Gentiles

wasn't the abrahamic covenant a promise to all the families of the earth? or was that the new covenant? okay. TMI.
nite and ty.

There were two Abrahamic covenants:

1) the unconditional covenant of the land promise (Gr 15:9-21) and

2) the conditional covenant of circumcision to be Abraham's God and the God of his descendants (Ge 17),
conditioned on performance by the people ("As for you," v.9), and by God ("As for me," v. 4).

The covenant of the land promise has been fulfilled (Josh 21:43-45; 1Kgs 4:21, 24-25).

Then the Mosaic covenant and law were a temporary addition (Ro 5:20; Gal 3:19) to the conditional
Abrahamic covenant of Ge 17.

The New covenant is unconditional, so it is not a continuation of the Abrahamic covenant of Ge 17.

 

[crossnote]

Remembering that the land promise has been fulfilled (Josh 21:43-45; 1Kgs 4:21, 24-25),
and the restoration has been accomplished in their return from captivity in Babylon, the rebuilding
of the walls and the Temple (Ne 12:43).

Scripture reports the promises to the nation of Israel have been fulfilled.

They never had full possession of the land originally promised. I think that would be a partial fulfillment...a foretaste if you will.

 

[crossnote]

It sure would help if the apostles taught such a doctrine in the NT epistles.

Did they not know about it? Did they not understand prophetic riddles in the same way?

Nor do the creeds of the early church reflect any such apostolic teaching.

In fact, it's not found in church history until the last 150 years, making it a new and novel doctrine.

I'm thinking it is the novelty of it that is so appealing.

The expectancy was there from the beginning...

Acts 1:6-7 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

There is no indication from Jesus that their hope was misdirected.They should have realized by now there would be no future physical kingdom if amillenialists are correct.

 

[RedTent]

The problem to solve is what covenants and laws are cancelled. Some say the new covenant cancelled all old ones, some that the NT lists the ones not cancelled, some divide the laws into categories and say some are cancelled some aren't---like moral laws. All these people have scripture to prove their point.

There are too many scriptures that say we are to be guided in our earthly walk by the law. The law is given to us two ways, by the Holy Spirit, and by the written word. Both must be used, they agree. The written word alone would mean legalistic law, and we are told that isn't good enough, law may only be read in spirit and truth and with the HS.

Many say that because we are not under law but under grace, it means not to listen to law. I think that is silly reasoning. If we were under law for salvation it would mean we are able to do God's place of saving ourselves, and we are not gods. It does not mean to not listen to law.

Paul is said to teach against the Torah---the first 5 books of the bible. In Acts it tells that they thought so at the beginning, and in Acts it says that he was cleared of that charge, yet it is still being said of him. The Torah gives us information about God and how our world operates that is necessary for us to know and understand. It uses people who lived 6,000 years ago and thought differently than we do, it is difficult for us to understand that world so we know about God, even. That is why the deep sea scrolls has been so important to out world, it gave information about the people we needed.

If it would be possible for Christians today to read Paul, to know he was from God, but to think of him as someone who would never, ever, say anything against what God says in the Torah, it would open up a new understanding and a great growth in our spiritual world.

 

[crossnote]

Christians shouldn't be "under" the law again in regards to salvation. Sadly, many try to achieve that, however.

There is nothing wrong with doing many of the things found in the Law, even if they are done imperfectly. Perfect obedience to the Law was never required of by God to earn salvation.

I do believe that there will be a time when there will be a new temple and sacrifices, etc. And I pray that the number of people who will be mislead by it will be few.

I understand their will be a false temple during the Tribulation and the true during the Millenium.

 

[crossnote]

The problem to solve is what covenants and laws are cancelled. Some say the new covenant cancelled all old ones, some that the NT lists the ones not cancelled, some divide the laws into categories and say some are cancelled some aren't---like moral laws. All these people have scripture to prove their point.

There are too many scriptures that say we are to be guided in our earthly walk by the law. The law is given to us two ways, by the Holy Spirit, and by the written word. Both must be used, they agree. The written word alone would mean legalistic law, and we are told that isn't good enough, law may only be read in spirit and truth and with the HS.

Many say that because we are not under law but under grace, it means not to listen to law. I think that is silly reasoning. If we were under law for salvation it would mean we are able to do God's place of saving ourselves, and we are not gods. It does not mean to not listen to law.

Paul is said to teach against the Torah---the first 5 books of the bible. In Acts it tells that they thought so at the beginning, and in Acts it says that he was cleared of that charge, yet it is still being said of him. The Torah gives us information about God and how our world operates that is necessary for us to know and understand. It uses people who lived 6,000 years ago and thought differently than we do, it is difficult for us to understand that world so we know about God, even. That is why the deep sea scrolls has been so important to out world, it gave information about the people we needed.

If it would be possible for Christians today to read Paul, to know he was from God, but to think of him as someone who would never, ever, say anything against what God says in the Torah, it would open up a new understanding and a great growth in our spiritual world.

Actually the issue is do we take the OT prophecies literally as their fulfillment has thus far been, or do we allegorize and spiritualize the Millenial reign of Christ or worse deny it all together.

 

[MidniteWelder]

There were two Abrahamic covenants:

1) the unconditional covenant of the land promise (Gr 15:9-21) and

2) the conditional covenant of circumcision to be Abraham's God and the God of his descendants (Ge 17),
conditioned on performance by the people ("As for you," v.9), and by God ("As for me," v. 4).

The covenant of the land promise has been fulfilled (Josh 21:43-45; 1Kgs 4:21, 24-25).

Then the Mosaic covenant and law were a temporary addition (Ro 5:20; Gal 3:19) to the conditional
Abrahamic covenant of Ge 17.

The New covenant is unconditional, so it is not a continuation of the Abrahamic covenant of Ge 17.

Hi Elin, I always like what you have to say.
But may I ask clarification for myself with something in this last sentence.
New covenant is unconditional in what way?
some people speak of unconditional things and some may misunderstand this such as myself for instance.
like God's unconditional love etc.
Because God still is just and will hold to his own guidelines before placing himself in the position of submitting to being a respecter of persons right?
I still am trying to find the unconditional love verse somewhere.
But that's beside the point
Jesus said if you love me you will obey my commands
IE:
(if this condition exists)
(you will prove it by this action)
That's a condition placed upon isn't it?
For instance, some may go around doing things in his name like casting out demons but then not obey his commands.
And Jesus said he will tell them plainly to depart from him for He never knew them.

So.....Do you mean unconditional as far as....any age, race, nationality, gender is allowed to accept Jesus?

 

[Linda70]

Are there physical blessings of the New Covenant?

Where are they found?

I've already posted all that information here. Down at the bottom of the post is a list of the promises of the New Covenant and the Scripture references.

 

[RedTent]

Actually the issue is do we take the OT prophecies literally as their fulfillment has thus far been, or do we allegorize and spiritualize the Millenial reign of Christ or worse deny it all together.

I don't see what that has to do with it. We know that those who take scripture as only literal are missing the point, and we also know that God is a God of spirit and truth, He is spirit. We only understand after we are born of the spirit. God uses our physical world to explain the spiritual. So by using exclusively one or the other is to not understand God's message.

 

[Elin]

They never had full possession of the land originally promised. I think that would be a partial fulfillment...a foretaste if you will.

Check the boundaries promised.

1Kgs 4:21, 24-25 states they possessed it to those boundaries.

There were no more campaigns to, or oppositions against, their possession of it.

They, however, did take more time to fully occupy it, but they fully possessed it under Solomon.

Scripture states the land promise has been fulfilled.

 

[Elin]

The expectancy was there from the beginning...

Acts 1:6-7 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?And he said unto them,
It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

Yes, it was one of the many things the Jews misunderstood in the prophecies regarding the Messiah.

There is no indication from Jesus that their hope was misdirected.

Right. . .as there is also no indication that they had understood it correctly.
Jesus enigmatic words actually give no indication of anything.

On more than one occasion, Jesus spoke enigmatically about what could not be understood
apart from the light of Calvary.
He likewise spoke enigmatically here about the kingdom within them, which could not be understood
apart from the giving of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, and the revelations to Paul.

This event occurred before Pentecost,
before his enactment of his promise that the Holy Spirit would enable them to understand
and recall all things correctly (Jn 14:26, 16:13-15),
before Christ's personal revelations to Paul explaining justification/righteous by faith and not by law keeping,
the nailing of our sins to the cross,
the abolishing in his flesh of the law with its commandments and regulations which was a dividing wall
of hostility between Jews and Gentiles,
the joining of Gentiles and Jews into one body of Christ, the church, the wife and Bride of Christ, the Lamb (Eph 5:31-32; Rev 21:9: Jn 1:29),
Christ in us, the hope of glory,
adoption as sons of God,
etc., etc., etc.

And what you don't find in that understanding given them, and presented in the epistles, is any presentation of a future temporal earthly millennial kingdom.

They should have realized by now there would be no future physical kingdom if amillenialists are correct.

No. . .they should have realized it after receiving the Holy Spirit and the revelations given to Paul.

And that is precisely what the epistles show; i.e, their realization that there was no future temporal earthly millennial kingdom, because it is nowhere presented in their epistles.
If it were the truth of Christ, surely they would have presented it at least once.

The silence of the epistles regarding a future temporal earthly millennial kingdom speaks so loudly
that it cannot be overcome by any private and uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles
which can be, and are, interpreted by others to mean things entirely different.

< Let the lobbing of tomatoes and eggs commence. . .>

 

[The_highwayman]

A great study of the 8 covenants in the Bible can be found here:

http://www.arielm.org/dcs/pdf/mbs021m.pdf

 

[crossnote]

Yes, it was one of the many things the Jews misunderstood in the prophecies regarding the Messiah.


Right. . .as there is also no indication that they had understood it correctly.
Jesus enigmatic words actually give no indication of anything.

On more than one occasion, Jesus spoke enigmatically about what could not be understood
apart from the light of Calvary.
He likewise spoke enigmatically here about the kingdom within them, which could not be understood
apart from the giving of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, and the revelations to Paul.

This event occurred before Pentecost,
before his enactment of his promise that the Holy Spirit would enable them to understand
and recall all things correctly (Jn 14:26, 16:13-15),
before Christ's personal revelations to Paul explaining justification/righteous by faith and not by law keeping,
the nailing of our sins to the cross,
the abolishing in his flesh of the law with its commandments and regulations which was a dividing wall
of hostility between Jews and Gentiles,
the joining of Gentiles and Jews into one body of Christ, the church, the wife and Bride of Christ, the Lamb (Eph 5:31-32; Rev 21:9: Jn 1:29),
Christ in us, the hope of glory,
adoption as sons of God,
etc., etc., etc.

And what you don't find in that understanding given them, and presented in the epistles, is any presentation of a future temporal earthly millennial kingdom.


No. . .they should have realized it after receiving the Holy Spirit and the revelations given to Paul.

And that is precisely what the epistles show; i.e, their realization that there was no future temporal earthly millennial kingdom, because it is nowhere presented in their epistles.
If it were the truth of Christ, surely they would have presented it at least once.

The silence of the epistles regarding a future temporal earthly millennial kingdom speaks so loudly
that it cannot be overcome by any private and uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles
which can be, and are, interpreted by others to mean things entirely different.

< Let the lobbing of tomatoes and eggs commence. . .>

Yes, Paul described a new thing, it's called the Church, but that did not make void the Abrahamic Covenant. His promises of the Land to the descendents of Abraham-Isaac and Jacob still hold and will be realized after Jacob's Trouble.
I know it's easy to 'spiritualize' the physical promises found in the OT, but that has never been the way they have been fulfilled in the past and no reason to see a spiritual fulfillment in the future.

 

[Larry_Stotle]

The promises to Abraham have been fulfilled:

(Gal 3:16 KJV) Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

(Gal 3:16 KJV) Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

(Gal 3:26 KJV) For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.


(Rom 15:8 KJV) Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

(Rom 15:9 KJV) And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.



(2 Cor 1:20 KJV) For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us.

(2 Cor 1:21 KJV) Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God;

 

[Timeline]

I understand their will be a false temple during the Tribulation and the true during the Millenium.

Revelation 21:22 I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.

 

[Elin]

There were two Abrahamic covenants:

1) the unconditional covenant of the land promise (Gr 15:9-21) and

2) the conditional covenant of circumcision to be Abraham's God and the God of his descendants (Ge 17),
conditioned on performance by the people ("As for you," v.9), and by God ("As for me," v. 4).

The covenant of the land promise has been fulfilled (Josh 21:43-45; 1Kgs 4:21, 24-25).

Then the Mosaic covenant and law were a temporary addition (Ro 5:20; Gal 3:19) to the conditional
Abrahamic covenant of Ge 17.
The Abrahamic covenant was a bilateral, conditional covenant with the descendants of Abraham only,
not with Gentiles.
The New covenant is unconditional, with both Gentiles and Jews unconditional,
so it is not a continuation of the Abrahamic covenant of Ge 17.

Hi Elin, I always like what you have to say.

Hey guy, where ya' been?

Good to hear from you.

But may I ask clarification for myself with something in this last sentence.
New covenant is unconditional in what way?

In regard to God's covenant, unconditional means a unilateral covenant which has no conditions which
the other party must perform, which can break the covenant by non-compliance.
God himself does all the performing, meets all the conditions himself,
as in the land covenant, which could not be broken.

In the New Covenant, salvation from God's wrath (Ro 5:9) is not by anything anyone performs.
It is all by what God himself has done in providing a propitiary sacrifice (Ro 3:25) to pay the penalty
for the sin of those who believe in Jesus Christ.

Even the faith required for the covenant is a gift of God (Php 1:29; 2Pe 1:1; Ac 18:27; Ro 12:3).

some people speak of unconditional things and some may misunderstand this such as myself for instance.
like God's unconditional love etc.
Because God still is just and will hold to his own guidelines before placing himself in the position of submitting to being a respecter of persons right?
I still am trying to find the unconditional love verse somewhere.
But that's beside the point
Jesus said if you love me you will obey my commands
IE:
(if this condition exists)
(you will prove it by this action)
That's a condition placed upon isn't it?

For instance, some may go around doing things in his name like casting out demons but then not obey his commands.
And Jesus said he will tell them plainly to depart from him for He never knew them.

Actually, works of obedience are not a condition of the covenant, they are a result of the covenant.

The gift of saving faith always results in obedience.
And that is what Jesus is describing, a true love and true faith, which obeys.

Any "love" and "faith" which does not obey is counterfeit (1Jn 2:19; Lk 8:13; Mt 7:21-23), and does not save.
It is a false claim of love or faith.

So.....Do you mean unconditional as far as....any age, race, nationality, gender is allowed to accept Jesus?

I hope you understand from the above that it means there are no conditions required to perform in order to enter the covenant.