Dispensationalism
- Thread starter Pamella
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
No, in reality what I have CLEARLY talked about is going back to the law after coming to Christ and committing adultery on our Lord.
I'll let JGIG in the thread "Dear Bibleguy" dealt with all the scriptural points one at a time concerning "law-keepers" and the perverting of the gospel of Christ alone for salvation.
I hope you enjoy your time with JGIG's thread about the law and how Christians are free from it. We do live by the law of the spirit of life in Christ, the law of love, the law of faith, the law of liberty - the law of Christ Himself in us.
The true Christian life is an exciting adventure in following Christ inside of us!
I'll let JGIG in the thread "Dear Bibleguy" dealt with all the scriptural points one at a time concerning "law-keepers" and the perverting of the gospel of Christ alone for salvation.
I hope you enjoy your time with JGIG's thread about the law and how Christians are free from it. We do live by the law of the spirit of life in Christ, the law of love, the law of faith, the law of liberty - the law of Christ Himself in us.
The true Christian life is an exciting adventure in following Christ inside of us!
Hello JGIG,
WOW! DOUBLE WOW! In fact….I must say it: TRIPLE WOW!
Is it really too hard to actually believe that Jesus’ teachings actually apply to us as His disciples?
Is that really too much to ask?
Disciples imitate Jesus in accordance with His teachings (Lk. 6:40; Mt. 10:24-25), but you (JGIG) do NOT want us to do that!
When a person tries to use PAUL to reject teachings of JESUS….I’d say we have a problem.
A REALLY BIG problem.
Peter warned about this (2 Pe. 3:16), and also the destruction that follows.
At least you are honest about the fact that you REJECT MANY of Jesus’ teachings, claiming that they ceased to be in force after the cross. (sad….)
So you believe the law is abolished, AND you believe Jesus’ teachings about the law are abolished, and you believe the Torah-obedient Prophets are abolished, and you believe the Torah-obedient Psalms are abolished, and you believe the Torah-obedient Proverbs are abolished….
Wow…we keep ripping things out of our Bibles…
It is sad to see the extent to which a person will go…vainly seeking to justify one’s anti-Torah theology.
Thus, I’m saddened to see that you reject MANY of Jesus’ teachings (claiming that they don’t apply to Christians after the cross).
I’m saddened to see that you do not believe the prophets at many points.
I’m saddened to see that you have not even addressed the Scriptural position as I’ve set it forth.
I’m saddened to see that you have misrepresented my position.
I’m saddened to see that you maintain arguments which I have already disconfirmed (yet you do not account for the disconfirming considerations I’ve already raised).
Sigh…
At least you have made some effort to explain your position a little bit more.
Let us now test your position in more detail:
1. You wrote: “You continue to build your case founded on an obsolete covenant, but I'll play along.”
My response: Why assume it’s bad to build a case on an obsolete covenant?
After all, the writer of Hebrews does the SAME THING!
Remember? The Old Covenant is READY (Gr. “engoos”, Heb. 8:13) to pass away, thereby confirming that it had NOT passed away as of the New-Covenant-era time of the writing of the book of Hebrews.
So there you have it (again). That’s PROOF that Old Covenant AND New Covenant function SIMULTANEOUSLY.
And since the writer of Hebrews believes that the obsolete covenant CONTINUES to function during the New Covenant era, THEN SO SHOULD YOU!
Sadly, your anti-Torah theology apparently forces you to ignore this consideration.
2. Regarding Dt. 30:16, you wrote: “So if one continues to read in that chapter, it becomes clear that God's promise was completely dependent on Israel obeying the commandments that God gave them. It wasn't a promise "100% future full Torah-obedience", but rather a promise made on a condition.
The 'IF' did not happen; thus the 'THEN' did not happen.”
My response: Good try. But your argument crumbles! You’re relying upon the LXX, not the Hebrew! Didn’t you read the ESV footnote?
Didn’t you see that there is no “if” in the Hebrew?
Thus, there is no “if” in the KJV, NKJV, NLT, HCSB, NASB, NET, ASV, YLT, DBY, WEB, or HNV.
Read it in the Hebrew….there is no “im” (i.e., the Hebrew for “if”).
So my point remains! Dt. 30:1-8 WILL occur. It GUARANTEES 100% full future Torah-obedience. Your only objection to this fact has now been refuted.
Time to reject your anti-Torah theology.
3. You wrote: “And Christ DID come, and now there is now a new Priesthood - the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ. He is of the Tribe of Judah, and as such, it would be illegal for Him to mediate the Old Covenant. And since His Priesthood is Permanent by an oath from God, it is clear that the Old Covenant is NEVER coming back.”
My response: Who ever said Jesus will “mediate” (whatever that means in your mind?) the Old Covenant?
Sure, Jesus (being of Judah) can not be a Levitical priest. But that’s no proof that He opposes Levitical Torah.
Remember? Jesus comes to RESTORE the covenant with Levi (Mal. 3:1-4) so that the offerings to YHVH will again be pleasing as in the days of old, as in former years.
Why would you oppose this Levitical-restoration purpose of our Messiah?
When your theology leads you to oppose the Messiah’s restoration purposes…you’ve got problems!
4. You wrote: “Some yahoos are building a temple and an altar and yes, there are some Levites who have kept track of their family lines, but if sacrifices are again offered in a temple in Jerusalem, they will NOT be sanctioned by God and will be an abomination to the Work of Christ and will be an insult to the Cross.”
My response: So it’s an ABOMINATION to return to YHVH in obedience to ALL Torah (even Levitical Torah) as Moses prophesied that we will do? (Dt. 30:1-8). Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to restore the covenant with Levi (Mal. 3:1-4), as Malachi prophesied would occur in the future? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to rebuild the temple (Zec. 6) where Levitical sacrificial activity will again occur? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to require Levitical activity as Ezekiel prophesied (Eze. 40-47)? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to expect all nations to celebrate the sacrifice-laden Sukkot (Zec. 14), as Zechariah prophesied? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to ensure fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant, complete with Levitical activity restored, just as Jeremiah prophesied (Jer. 33)? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to permit Levitical restoration associated with Sabbath and New Moon (Is. 66), as Isaiah prophesied would occur in the future? Of course not.
Again…your anti-Torah theology is simply forcing you to ignore a LARGE body of evidence from the prophets.
5. I have noted that fulfillment of the land-promise to Israel through Abraham occurs IN CONJUNCTION WITH obedience to 100% of Torah (Dt. 6:10,25; see also Dt. 30:1-20).
You answer: “Again, BibleGuy, not possible because of the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ.”
My response: Why assume the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ forces us to IGNORE the yet-unfulfilled prophecy in Dt. 30?
After all, that very CHRIST told us that Torah can not cease to be in force until ALL is accomplished. AND, Dt. 30:1-8 is NOT yet accomplished!
Here again, we have PROOF that Torah is still in force (not abolished).
Your position is (again) disconfirmed.
6. You wrote: “So I have no doubt that God's promises will be fulfilled, but I do know it won't be through or "in conjunction with obedience to 100%of Torah." “
My response: How can God’s promise (through the prophet Moses, Dt. 30:1-8) be fulfilled regarding 100% future Torah-obedience, yet not in conjunction with obedience to 100% of Torah?
Your position is clearly inconsistent and, thus, disconfirmed.
7. You wrote: “Take the Pharisees, for instance. They knew Scripture inside and out - yet completely missed Messiah when He came.”
My response: No…some Pharisees were believers (Ac. 15:5).
8. You cited Heb. 7:12-22, but I, of course, agree with Heb. 7:12-22! You have given us no reason to suppose that this passage favors your position.
9. I emphasized that Jer. 23 has Jesus coming to bring us back to live in the land of Israel (Jer. 23:8). But this occurs in conjunction with 100% obedience to Torah (Dt. 30:1-8) as Jesus rules with justice (Heb. “mishpat”, jer. 23:5). And hwere is each “mishpat” of YHVH found? The written Torah of Moses (see “mishpat” in 1 Ki. 2:3) in which Jesus will be ruling!
And again, Jesus will be ruling in righteousness (Heb. “tsedekah”, Jer. 23:5). And what are these ways of “tsedekah”? Torah! (see “tsedekah” in Dt. 6:25).
So, how do you reconcile your anti-Torah viewpoint with Jer. 23 which disconfirms it?
Sure, Jesus functions in the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood…but that’s no excuse to oppose Jer. 23!
10. You wrote: “Yours is the classic 'Jesus +' equation of sooooo many false belief systems. "Jesus is good, BUT NOW YOU MUST . . . " to maintain that salvation.”
My response: YOU likewise agree that “after Jesus” we should bear fruit! So you ALSO believe in the “Jesus +” equation!
James agrees! Faith without works is dead (Jas. 2:17). Therefore, James believes in the “Jesus +” equation too.
Paul agrees! We are saved by grace through faith….BUT THERE’s MORE! We also do GOOD WORKS (Eph. 2:10). So, Paul ALSO believes in the “Jesus +” equation.
Yes, we start with faith in Jesus. BUT THERE’S MORE! We must also do good works (otherwise our faith was dead).
And should our works OBEY or DISOBEY the Torah of the covenants in which we participate?
Obviously….OBEY!
Do we obey “to maintain that salvation”? Of course not…we obey simply because we LOVE (1 Jn. 5:3; Dt. 6:5,25; Jn. 14:15). That’s HOW we love…through obedience.
How could you not lovingly obey our God who has so graciously saved us by faith?
11. You wrote: “Jesus preached the Law to those born under the Law. We who are in Christ after His Work of the Cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension, and under His Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood have died to the Law (see Rom. 7:4-6). Torah has nothing to do with those who have died to it.”
My response: Sure…we are dead to the law (Rom. 7:4) of sin (Rom. 7:23,25), but we joyfully CONCUR with Torah (Rom. 7:22) and SERVE IT (Rom. 7:25) in newness of the Spirit (Rom. 7:6).
Again, Paul contrasts flesh and Spirit (Rom. 8), where the flesh does not obey Torah (Rom. 8:7). Thus, by contrast, it follows that we who walk by the Spirit obey Torah.
Again, Paul took a vow to prove he walked “orderly in obedience to the law”, even infant circumcision law (Ac. 21).
Again, Paul taught against sin (Rom. 6:15), and sin is Torah-disobedience (Rom. 3:20; 7:7), so Paul taught against Torah-disobedience; thus, Paul taught Torah-obedience.
Again, Paul continued to believe (not disobey!) everything in the Torah and Prophets (Ac. 24:14). We should imitate Paul (Ac. 26:29; 1 Cor. 11:1; Php. 4:9).
Again, Paul said that those who do the law will be justified (Rom. 2:13).
Again, Paul said that uncircumcised Gentiles who obey Torah are a rebuking judgment of circumcised people who obey Torah improperly (Rom. 2:26).
Again, Paul said that we should keep God’s commands (1 Cor. 7:19). God’s commands are contained in the written Torah of Moses (1 Ki. 2:3).
Again, Paul said ALL SCRIPTURE (Yes…even Torah!) should correct and train our behavior (2 Ti. 3:16).
There are dozens more reasons along these lines…let’s start with this for now.
So, we who are “dead to law” (Rom. 7) should (according to Paul) STILL OBEY TORAH! (given the reasons I’ve just listed).
Unless you find a good way to explain away all of these (and many many more) reasons, we must simply infer that you have misinterpreted Paul’s “dead to the law” concept expressed in Rom. 7:4.
Don’t feel bad…Paul’s writings are hard to understand (2 Pe. 3:16)…but now it’s time for you to get honest with the COMPLETE Pauline perspective on Torah (rather than just a pick-and-choose out-of-context approach that mishandles the Biblical data).
12. You quote Rom. 3:21-25.
My response: There are TWO groups here.
GROUP 1: Does works of the law.
GROUP 2: Has faith.
Which group has NO faith? GROUP 1!
If Group 1 had faith, then It would make no sense to criticize Group 1 for having no faith.
Therefore, Group 1 has no faith.
Therefore, Group 1 does FAITHLESS works of the law.
Therefore, Paul is critiquing FAITHLESS works of the law.
Does it follow that Paul also opposes FAITHFUL works of the law? Of course not. Faithful Torah-obedience IS the very word of faith which Paul preached (Dt. 30:14 favorably cited at Rom. 10:8).
And, see #11 above.
13. You wrote: “And Scripture tells us that love is the fulfillment of the Law - that if we're loving others, we are doing them no harm, and any of the laws that God still cares about from the Old Covenant are automatically obeyed by us simply loving one another.”
My response: Got ya! If we love others, then we automatically obey Torah through that love.
Therefore, let us obey Torah (and let it be automatic and natural and maximal!), for that is how we love one another.
Let us obey Torah…for that is HOW we love one another.
After all, love FULFILLS (not REPLACES! NOT TERMINATES!) the law.
Moreover, why pretend that God only cares about some of the Old Covenant laws?
Remember Dt. 30:1-8? We will return to YHVH and obey ALL Torah!
14. You wrote: “if we are led by the Spirit we are not under the Law (Gal. 5:18)”
My response: Sure, we are not UNDER THE CURSE (Gal. 3:10) of the law (that’s the context!). Rather, we are led by the SPIRIT (Gal. 5:18).
And what did Paul tell us about flesh vs. Spirit?
The flesh does NOT obey Torah (Rom. 8:7), so the Spirit (by contrast) leads us to obey Torah.
And surprise surprise….Ezekiel AGREES that the Spirit leads us to OBEY Torah statutes and ordinances (Eze. 36:27).
And again, the Spirit testifies that Torah is written upon our hearts (Heb. 10:15-16), not abolished!
So let’s stop pretending that “not under the law” (in Gal. 5:18) means we are free to disobey it.
Paul taught that we should NOT disobey it (seen from the conjunction of Rom. 6:15; 3:20; 7:7).
15. I note that faith (Gr. "pistis", Gal. 3:11) = faithfulness (Heb. "emunah", Hab. 2:4, which Paul quoted at Gal. 3:11).
And what is this way of "emunah" by which Paul said we live? Torah! (see "emunah" in Ps. 119:30,86,138)
Thus Paul has us admonishing one another with the Psalms (Col. 3:16). Thus, I admonish you to obey the Torah of the Psalms, just as Paul requires that I admonish you.
So we who are of faith OBEY Torah.
You respond: “Gee you went to all that trouble to use a definition of pistis that contextually does not fit in Gal. 3:11…”
My response: It ABSOLUTELY fits! I simply showed you Hab. 2:4 WHICH PAUL QUOTED! Hab. 2:4 IS THE CONTEXT! Thus, we must USE Paul’s conception of “emunah” in the context of Gal. 3. And Paul’s conception of “emunah” is simply the Tanach’s conception of “emunah”. And what does the Tanach say about “emunah”? It says that “emunah” upholds Torah-obedience (not Torah-opposition! See “emunah” in Ps. 119:30,86,138).
So, consider the following:
P1 = Faithless law-keeping is not based on faith
P2 = Faithful law-keeping is not based on faith
Now, given Paul’s usage of “emunah” in Gal. 3:11, we must ask: Does Gal. 3:12 refer to P1 or P2?
Answer: Obviously P1! Why? Because it makes no sense to say that faithful law-keepers have no faith (because that would be a contradiction!)
After all, FAITHFUL law-keepers have faith in the Messiah (Dt. 18) and, thus, in ALL His teachings and, thus, in His apostles and ALL their teachings.
FAITHLESS law-keepers would NOT have faith in the Messiah, but would simply try to earn righteousness (or justification or salvation or whatever) from God through their works without faith in Messiah.
Therefore, Gal. 3:12 is yet another instance where Paul critiques FAITHLESS law-keeping.
Does it follow that Paul also critiques FAITHFUL law-keeping?
Of course not…because that would violate the “emunah” context, and it would contradict Paul’s supportive view of faithful Torah-obedience, as I’ve now amply shown (see #11 above for more).
16. You cite Titus 2.
My response: That again confirms my position!
TITUS 2:5 The word of God should not be blasphemed or maligned (Tit. 2:5). The word of God includes the Torah (Dt. 5:27-33; Mk. 7:9-13). Thus, Christians should obey (not malign) the Torah.
17. You wrote: “I'll go with the better way in Christ rather than the weak and useless method to bear His Fruit and bring forth harvests of righteousness.”
My response: Weak and useless?
Jesus required that we exemplify Torah-obedient acts of righteousness so as to enter the kingdom of God (Mt. 5:20).
You have effectively just accused Jesus of setting forth a weak and useless method for exemplifying righteousness.
Are you SURE you want to STAND OPPOSED to Jesus teachings?
Yikes! (yes, I said it again…)
Mt. 28:20 REQUIRES that we UPHHOLD all of Jesus pre-cross teachings as we make disciples of all nations.
Apparently you ignore this consideration, and choose to reject Jesus’ instruction (Mt. 5:20) regarding the Torah-obedient righteousness He says we should exemplify.
Sad…
(continued in subsequent post)
WOW! DOUBLE WOW! In fact….I must say it: TRIPLE WOW!
Is it really too hard to actually believe that Jesus’ teachings actually apply to us as His disciples?
Is that really too much to ask?
Disciples imitate Jesus in accordance with His teachings (Lk. 6:40; Mt. 10:24-25), but you (JGIG) do NOT want us to do that!
When a person tries to use PAUL to reject teachings of JESUS….I’d say we have a problem.
A REALLY BIG problem.
Peter warned about this (2 Pe. 3:16), and also the destruction that follows.
At least you are honest about the fact that you REJECT MANY of Jesus’ teachings, claiming that they ceased to be in force after the cross. (sad….)
So you believe the law is abolished, AND you believe Jesus’ teachings about the law are abolished, and you believe the Torah-obedient Prophets are abolished, and you believe the Torah-obedient Psalms are abolished, and you believe the Torah-obedient Proverbs are abolished….
Wow…we keep ripping things out of our Bibles…
It is sad to see the extent to which a person will go…vainly seeking to justify one’s anti-Torah theology.
Thus, I’m saddened to see that you reject MANY of Jesus’ teachings (claiming that they don’t apply to Christians after the cross).
I’m saddened to see that you do not believe the prophets at many points.
I’m saddened to see that you have not even addressed the Scriptural position as I’ve set it forth.
I’m saddened to see that you have misrepresented my position.
I’m saddened to see that you maintain arguments which I have already disconfirmed (yet you do not account for the disconfirming considerations I’ve already raised).
Sigh…
At least you have made some effort to explain your position a little bit more.
Let us now test your position in more detail:
1. You wrote: “You continue to build your case founded on an obsolete covenant, but I'll play along.”
My response: Why assume it’s bad to build a case on an obsolete covenant?
After all, the writer of Hebrews does the SAME THING!
Remember? The Old Covenant is READY (Gr. “engoos”, Heb. 8:13) to pass away, thereby confirming that it had NOT passed away as of the New-Covenant-era time of the writing of the book of Hebrews.
So there you have it (again). That’s PROOF that Old Covenant AND New Covenant function SIMULTANEOUSLY.
And since the writer of Hebrews believes that the obsolete covenant CONTINUES to function during the New Covenant era, THEN SO SHOULD YOU!
Sadly, your anti-Torah theology apparently forces you to ignore this consideration.
2. Regarding Dt. 30:16, you wrote: “So if one continues to read in that chapter, it becomes clear that God's promise was completely dependent on Israel obeying the commandments that God gave them. It wasn't a promise "100% future full Torah-obedience", but rather a promise made on a condition.
The 'IF' did not happen; thus the 'THEN' did not happen.”
My response: Good try. But your argument crumbles! You’re relying upon the LXX, not the Hebrew! Didn’t you read the ESV footnote?
Didn’t you see that there is no “if” in the Hebrew?
Thus, there is no “if” in the KJV, NKJV, NLT, HCSB, NASB, NET, ASV, YLT, DBY, WEB, or HNV.
Read it in the Hebrew….there is no “im” (i.e., the Hebrew for “if”).
So my point remains! Dt. 30:1-8 WILL occur. It GUARANTEES 100% full future Torah-obedience. Your only objection to this fact has now been refuted.
Time to reject your anti-Torah theology.
3. You wrote: “And Christ DID come, and now there is now a new Priesthood - the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ. He is of the Tribe of Judah, and as such, it would be illegal for Him to mediate the Old Covenant. And since His Priesthood is Permanent by an oath from God, it is clear that the Old Covenant is NEVER coming back.”
My response: Who ever said Jesus will “mediate” (whatever that means in your mind?) the Old Covenant?
Sure, Jesus (being of Judah) can not be a Levitical priest. But that’s no proof that He opposes Levitical Torah.
Remember? Jesus comes to RESTORE the covenant with Levi (Mal. 3:1-4) so that the offerings to YHVH will again be pleasing as in the days of old, as in former years.
Why would you oppose this Levitical-restoration purpose of our Messiah?
When your theology leads you to oppose the Messiah’s restoration purposes…you’ve got problems!
4. You wrote: “Some yahoos are building a temple and an altar and yes, there are some Levites who have kept track of their family lines, but if sacrifices are again offered in a temple in Jerusalem, they will NOT be sanctioned by God and will be an abomination to the Work of Christ and will be an insult to the Cross.”
My response: So it’s an ABOMINATION to return to YHVH in obedience to ALL Torah (even Levitical Torah) as Moses prophesied that we will do? (Dt. 30:1-8). Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to restore the covenant with Levi (Mal. 3:1-4), as Malachi prophesied would occur in the future? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to rebuild the temple (Zec. 6) where Levitical sacrificial activity will again occur? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to require Levitical activity as Ezekiel prophesied (Eze. 40-47)? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to expect all nations to celebrate the sacrifice-laden Sukkot (Zec. 14), as Zechariah prophesied? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to ensure fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant, complete with Levitical activity restored, just as Jeremiah prophesied (Jer. 33)? Of course not.
It’s an ABOMINATION for Jesus to permit Levitical restoration associated with Sabbath and New Moon (Is. 66), as Isaiah prophesied would occur in the future? Of course not.
Again…your anti-Torah theology is simply forcing you to ignore a LARGE body of evidence from the prophets.
5. I have noted that fulfillment of the land-promise to Israel through Abraham occurs IN CONJUNCTION WITH obedience to 100% of Torah (Dt. 6:10,25; see also Dt. 30:1-20).
You answer: “Again, BibleGuy, not possible because of the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ.”
My response: Why assume the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ forces us to IGNORE the yet-unfulfilled prophecy in Dt. 30?
After all, that very CHRIST told us that Torah can not cease to be in force until ALL is accomplished. AND, Dt. 30:1-8 is NOT yet accomplished!
Here again, we have PROOF that Torah is still in force (not abolished).
Your position is (again) disconfirmed.
6. You wrote: “So I have no doubt that God's promises will be fulfilled, but I do know it won't be through or "in conjunction with obedience to 100%of Torah." “
My response: How can God’s promise (through the prophet Moses, Dt. 30:1-8) be fulfilled regarding 100% future Torah-obedience, yet not in conjunction with obedience to 100% of Torah?
Your position is clearly inconsistent and, thus, disconfirmed.
7. You wrote: “Take the Pharisees, for instance. They knew Scripture inside and out - yet completely missed Messiah when He came.”
My response: No…some Pharisees were believers (Ac. 15:5).
8. You cited Heb. 7:12-22, but I, of course, agree with Heb. 7:12-22! You have given us no reason to suppose that this passage favors your position.
9. I emphasized that Jer. 23 has Jesus coming to bring us back to live in the land of Israel (Jer. 23:8). But this occurs in conjunction with 100% obedience to Torah (Dt. 30:1-8) as Jesus rules with justice (Heb. “mishpat”, jer. 23:5). And hwere is each “mishpat” of YHVH found? The written Torah of Moses (see “mishpat” in 1 Ki. 2:3) in which Jesus will be ruling!
And again, Jesus will be ruling in righteousness (Heb. “tsedekah”, Jer. 23:5). And what are these ways of “tsedekah”? Torah! (see “tsedekah” in Dt. 6:25).
So, how do you reconcile your anti-Torah viewpoint with Jer. 23 which disconfirms it?
Sure, Jesus functions in the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood…but that’s no excuse to oppose Jer. 23!
10. You wrote: “Yours is the classic 'Jesus +' equation of sooooo many false belief systems. "Jesus is good, BUT NOW YOU MUST . . . " to maintain that salvation.”
My response: YOU likewise agree that “after Jesus” we should bear fruit! So you ALSO believe in the “Jesus +” equation!
James agrees! Faith without works is dead (Jas. 2:17). Therefore, James believes in the “Jesus +” equation too.
Paul agrees! We are saved by grace through faith….BUT THERE’s MORE! We also do GOOD WORKS (Eph. 2:10). So, Paul ALSO believes in the “Jesus +” equation.
Yes, we start with faith in Jesus. BUT THERE’S MORE! We must also do good works (otherwise our faith was dead).
And should our works OBEY or DISOBEY the Torah of the covenants in which we participate?
Obviously….OBEY!
Do we obey “to maintain that salvation”? Of course not…we obey simply because we LOVE (1 Jn. 5:3; Dt. 6:5,25; Jn. 14:15). That’s HOW we love…through obedience.
How could you not lovingly obey our God who has so graciously saved us by faith?
11. You wrote: “Jesus preached the Law to those born under the Law. We who are in Christ after His Work of the Cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension, and under His Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood have died to the Law (see Rom. 7:4-6). Torah has nothing to do with those who have died to it.”
My response: Sure…we are dead to the law (Rom. 7:4) of sin (Rom. 7:23,25), but we joyfully CONCUR with Torah (Rom. 7:22) and SERVE IT (Rom. 7:25) in newness of the Spirit (Rom. 7:6).
Again, Paul contrasts flesh and Spirit (Rom. 8), where the flesh does not obey Torah (Rom. 8:7). Thus, by contrast, it follows that we who walk by the Spirit obey Torah.
Again, Paul took a vow to prove he walked “orderly in obedience to the law”, even infant circumcision law (Ac. 21).
Again, Paul taught against sin (Rom. 6:15), and sin is Torah-disobedience (Rom. 3:20; 7:7), so Paul taught against Torah-disobedience; thus, Paul taught Torah-obedience.
Again, Paul continued to believe (not disobey!) everything in the Torah and Prophets (Ac. 24:14). We should imitate Paul (Ac. 26:29; 1 Cor. 11:1; Php. 4:9).
Again, Paul said that those who do the law will be justified (Rom. 2:13).
Again, Paul said that uncircumcised Gentiles who obey Torah are a rebuking judgment of circumcised people who obey Torah improperly (Rom. 2:26).
Again, Paul said that we should keep God’s commands (1 Cor. 7:19). God’s commands are contained in the written Torah of Moses (1 Ki. 2:3).
Again, Paul said ALL SCRIPTURE (Yes…even Torah!) should correct and train our behavior (2 Ti. 3:16).
There are dozens more reasons along these lines…let’s start with this for now.
So, we who are “dead to law” (Rom. 7) should (according to Paul) STILL OBEY TORAH! (given the reasons I’ve just listed).
Unless you find a good way to explain away all of these (and many many more) reasons, we must simply infer that you have misinterpreted Paul’s “dead to the law” concept expressed in Rom. 7:4.
Don’t feel bad…Paul’s writings are hard to understand (2 Pe. 3:16)…but now it’s time for you to get honest with the COMPLETE Pauline perspective on Torah (rather than just a pick-and-choose out-of-context approach that mishandles the Biblical data).
12. You quote Rom. 3:21-25.
My response: There are TWO groups here.
GROUP 1: Does works of the law.
GROUP 2: Has faith.
Which group has NO faith? GROUP 1!
If Group 1 had faith, then It would make no sense to criticize Group 1 for having no faith.
Therefore, Group 1 has no faith.
Therefore, Group 1 does FAITHLESS works of the law.
Therefore, Paul is critiquing FAITHLESS works of the law.
Does it follow that Paul also opposes FAITHFUL works of the law? Of course not. Faithful Torah-obedience IS the very word of faith which Paul preached (Dt. 30:14 favorably cited at Rom. 10:8).
And, see #11 above.
13. You wrote: “And Scripture tells us that love is the fulfillment of the Law - that if we're loving others, we are doing them no harm, and any of the laws that God still cares about from the Old Covenant are automatically obeyed by us simply loving one another.”
My response: Got ya! If we love others, then we automatically obey Torah through that love.
Therefore, let us obey Torah (and let it be automatic and natural and maximal!), for that is how we love one another.
Let us obey Torah…for that is HOW we love one another.
After all, love FULFILLS (not REPLACES! NOT TERMINATES!) the law.
Moreover, why pretend that God only cares about some of the Old Covenant laws?
Remember Dt. 30:1-8? We will return to YHVH and obey ALL Torah!
14. You wrote: “if we are led by the Spirit we are not under the Law (Gal. 5:18)”
My response: Sure, we are not UNDER THE CURSE (Gal. 3:10) of the law (that’s the context!). Rather, we are led by the SPIRIT (Gal. 5:18).
And what did Paul tell us about flesh vs. Spirit?
The flesh does NOT obey Torah (Rom. 8:7), so the Spirit (by contrast) leads us to obey Torah.
And surprise surprise….Ezekiel AGREES that the Spirit leads us to OBEY Torah statutes and ordinances (Eze. 36:27).
And again, the Spirit testifies that Torah is written upon our hearts (Heb. 10:15-16), not abolished!
So let’s stop pretending that “not under the law” (in Gal. 5:18) means we are free to disobey it.
Paul taught that we should NOT disobey it (seen from the conjunction of Rom. 6:15; 3:20; 7:7).
15. I note that faith (Gr. "pistis", Gal. 3:11) = faithfulness (Heb. "emunah", Hab. 2:4, which Paul quoted at Gal. 3:11).
And what is this way of "emunah" by which Paul said we live? Torah! (see "emunah" in Ps. 119:30,86,138)
Thus Paul has us admonishing one another with the Psalms (Col. 3:16). Thus, I admonish you to obey the Torah of the Psalms, just as Paul requires that I admonish you.
So we who are of faith OBEY Torah.
You respond: “Gee you went to all that trouble to use a definition of pistis that contextually does not fit in Gal. 3:11…”
My response: It ABSOLUTELY fits! I simply showed you Hab. 2:4 WHICH PAUL QUOTED! Hab. 2:4 IS THE CONTEXT! Thus, we must USE Paul’s conception of “emunah” in the context of Gal. 3. And Paul’s conception of “emunah” is simply the Tanach’s conception of “emunah”. And what does the Tanach say about “emunah”? It says that “emunah” upholds Torah-obedience (not Torah-opposition! See “emunah” in Ps. 119:30,86,138).
So, consider the following:
P1 = Faithless law-keeping is not based on faith
P2 = Faithful law-keeping is not based on faith
Now, given Paul’s usage of “emunah” in Gal. 3:11, we must ask: Does Gal. 3:12 refer to P1 or P2?
Answer: Obviously P1! Why? Because it makes no sense to say that faithful law-keepers have no faith (because that would be a contradiction!)
After all, FAITHFUL law-keepers have faith in the Messiah (Dt. 18) and, thus, in ALL His teachings and, thus, in His apostles and ALL their teachings.
FAITHLESS law-keepers would NOT have faith in the Messiah, but would simply try to earn righteousness (or justification or salvation or whatever) from God through their works without faith in Messiah.
Therefore, Gal. 3:12 is yet another instance where Paul critiques FAITHLESS law-keeping.
Does it follow that Paul also critiques FAITHFUL law-keeping?
Of course not…because that would violate the “emunah” context, and it would contradict Paul’s supportive view of faithful Torah-obedience, as I’ve now amply shown (see #11 above for more).
16. You cite Titus 2.
My response: That again confirms my position!
TITUS 2:5 The word of God should not be blasphemed or maligned (Tit. 2:5). The word of God includes the Torah (Dt. 5:27-33; Mk. 7:9-13). Thus, Christians should obey (not malign) the Torah.
17. You wrote: “I'll go with the better way in Christ rather than the weak and useless method to bear His Fruit and bring forth harvests of righteousness.”
My response: Weak and useless?
Jesus required that we exemplify Torah-obedient acts of righteousness so as to enter the kingdom of God (Mt. 5:20).
You have effectively just accused Jesus of setting forth a weak and useless method for exemplifying righteousness.
Are you SURE you want to STAND OPPOSED to Jesus teachings?
Yikes! (yes, I said it again…)
Mt. 28:20 REQUIRES that we UPHHOLD all of Jesus pre-cross teachings as we make disciples of all nations.
Apparently you ignore this consideration, and choose to reject Jesus’ instruction (Mt. 5:20) regarding the Torah-obedient righteousness He says we should exemplify.
Sad…
(continued in subsequent post)
(continued from previous post)
18. You wrote: “You're trying to turn what is a covenant of Grace regarding Abraham into a covenant of Law - and it is nothing of the sort.”
My response: To the contrary…why do you resist acknowledging that God blessed Abraham BECAUSE (Heb. “akev”, Ge. 26:5) Abraham obeyed?
Therefore, Abraham was graciously granted righteousness by faith, AND God’s blessing to Abraham was given BECAUSE Abraham OBEYED (Ge. 26:5).
We should likewise imitate Abraham and be graciously granted righteousness by faith, AND share in the inheritance given to Abraham BECAUSE we likewise obey.
Why would you oppose this Scriptural fact regarding the faith and obedience of Abraham?
19. I say: “Why would you oppose Torah, when it is transferred directly into the New Covenant? (see "Torah", Jer. 31:33).”
You respond: “Since Jeremiah could not see the Work of the Cross from where he sat, God left it to the Apostles to clarify what His Law would be after the Cross: To believe on the One He sent and to love one another (1 Jn. 3:23-24).”
My response: Jeremiah ALREADY TOLD US that “TORAH” passes into the New Covenant (see “TORAH” in Jer. 31:33).
When Jeremiah uses “Torah” he is, of course, referring to the Torah of Moses.
If Jeremiah was prophesying of a new Torah that is anti-Mosaic-Torah, then Jeremiah would be a false prophet.
AND, you concede that the New Covenant is different than the Old, “because they broke my [old] covenant”.
Therefore, Mosaic Torah was broken in the Old Covenant, whereas (in the New Covenant) Mosaic Torah will NOT be broken!
Yes! Mosaic Torah will be written upon our hearts (Jer. 31:33) so that we will obey it (Dt. 30:14), as Paul FAVORABLY affirms (Rom. 10:8) that this is the Torah-obedient word of faith which he preached.
Furthermore, we should love one another AS HE COMMANDED US (1 Jn. 3:23).
Therefore, Mt. 28:20 is STILL IN FORCE!
Mt. 28:20 applies all of Jesus' Torah-obedient PRE-CROSS teachings to disciples of all nations.
So your appeal to 1 Jn. 3:23 leads us to Torah yet again!
Furthermore, the apostle Paul AGREES that Mosaic Torah is included in the New Covenant (see #11 above, for example).
20. You wrote: “Jesus was preaching the Law to those born under the Law before the Cross. After the Cross God's Law was to believe on the One He sent and for us to love one another… Torah obedience has ZERO to do with righteousness after the Cross. ZERO.”
My response: NO! After the cross, Jesus applied ALL of His pre-cross teachings to disciples of all nations! (Mt.28:20).
21. You wrote: “If you insist on obtaining/attaining righteousness through the Law, Paul is talking about you here…”
My response: I insist on Biblical Scripture! What does it say? We are righteous by faith (just like Abraham, Rom. 4), AND righteousness is something we DO (Gr. “poieo”, 1 Jn. 3:10, Mt. 5:20) or else we are NOT OF GOD!
I insist on both, per the Scriptures which require it.
Why can’t you admit that righteousness is also something we DO?
It doesn’t fit into your (incorrect) anti-Torah theology.
22. You wrote: “Paul recognized that though blameless under the Law, righteousness still was not obtained/attained.”
My response: No. Zacharias and Elizabeth WERE BOTH RIGHTEOUS IN THE SIGHT OF GOD! (Lk. 1:6)
I know it’s hard for you to believe…but they actually faithfully obeyed Torah, exemplifying works of righteousness blamelessly, as we should!
Sure, law-righteousness of our own (apart from faith) should be counted as loss (Php. 3:7), but FAITHFUL law-righteousness is required by both Paul AND Jesus!
STOP confusing the two!
23. You wrote: “No, the righteousness that comes from God (and is apart from the Law) is a gift, given when we put our faith in Christ!”
My response: AND Christ and His apostles teach us to faithfully obey Torah. So stop opposing it!
24. I wrote: “Again, Jesus said we live by Torah (Mt. 4:4; citing Dt. 8:3, referencing Torah). He never said it was impossible!”
You answered: “No, that's not what Christ said. The Greek there is 'rhema', not 'nomos', which is the Greek word used for 'Law' or 'Torah' in the NT. Heck, a case might even be made if the author had used the Greek 'graphe' which means written Scriptures, but he didn't, he used 'rhema', meaning spoken, leading word of God, not the written Scriptures of Torah.”
My response: I already refuted this! Sadly…you’ve not bothered to learn from my previous critique of your position.
Here we go again.
You wrongly claim that “rhema” does not refer to Torah.
Here’s proof (again!) that “rhema” refers to Torah.
READ Dt. 8:3 in the LXX! Guess what? It’s RHEMA! Yes, “rhema” is used to refer to the word of God in Dt. 8:3, which in turn is simply referencing the Torah of Moses.
Therefore, Jesus’ quotation of Dt. 8:3 (Mt. 4:4) is ANOTHER proof that Jesus expects us to LIVE by Torah (not pretend it is abolished!)
Likewise, “rhema” refers to Torah in Dt. 30:14 LXX, and Paul uses this same “rhema” at Rom. 10:8, where Paul FAVORABLY affirms that the Torah-obedient Dt. 30:14 context IS the substance of the word of faith which Paul preaches.
AND, Mt. 28:20 requires that we teach this to disciples of all nations (even though JGIG does not want you to do that).
So let’s learn how to use the Biblical languages better.
“Rhema” can refer to “Torah”.
Stop misleading people.
25. I wrote: “Again, Moses said Torah-obedience is NOT too difficult (Dt. 30:11), thereby confirming that we CAN walk in Torah-obedient righteousness per Dt. 6:25.
Did Jesus say: "Hey guys....read Dt. 6:4-5 BUT IGNORE THE CONTEXT!"
Of course not! Therefore, you can't cut Dt. 6:4-5 out of the Torah and impose a foreign meaning upon it simply to accommodate your anti-Torah theology.
Jesus APPLIED Dt. 6 to YOU (Mt. 22:37), context and all.”
You answered: “Yet you ignore the big fat IF in Deut. 6:25 (you know, part of the context of that passage).”
My response: Sure, some people obey Torah, others don’t.
Nevertheless, my position remains. Jesus applied Dt. 6 to YOU (context and all).
And Moses said you CAN obey Torah, because it is NOT too difficult (Dt. 30:11).
Paul AGREES (transferring that very passage into Rom. 10:8 where Paul tells us that this IS the word of faith he preached).
26. I wrote: “In fact, Jesus said Torah-obedience is a sufficient condition of eternal life (Lk. 10:25-28), again disconfirming your position.”
You answered: “And Jesus also pointed out to each and every one who claimed they kept the Law exactly where they fell short. Again, Jesus preached the Law to those born under the Law. He was telling them, "Here is the Law, but not the watered down Law you've been taught - here's the full weight of what the Law requires", and NO ONE could measure up. That was the point!”
My response: No! Zacharias and Elizabeth were both RIGHTEOUS AND BLAMELESS IN ALL THE COMMANDS of Torah (Lk. 1:6). I think you forgot that one again…
Sure, Zacharias and Elizabeth were not SINLESS…but the Torah has provision for sin built into it. And this points us to the need for a permanent once-for-all sacrifice to permanently take away sins. But that’s no excuse to disobey Torah! Thus, Zacharias and Elizabeth CONTINUED to be Righteous and Blameless in Torah-obedience, even though they were human beings who had sinned.
Jesus never said that you can not faithfully obey Torah like Zacharias and Elizabeth.
Sure, we are not righteous in God’s sight by works of the law without faith (Rom. 3:20), but that’s no excuse to fail to exemplify FAITHFUL works of the law.
27. You wrote: “Whether you have faith or not when 'doing' the Law, they are dead works.”
My response: No! Faith without works is dead (Jas. 2:17). Works without faith is also bad (Gal. 5:4-5). Therefore we need BOTH faith AND works! Thus, faithful Torah-obedient works are not dead, because they exhibit both faith AND works, thus they are NOT subject to the “deadness” of Jas. 2:17 (which only applies if works are absent from “faith”).
And, faithful Torah-obedience is commanded throughout Scripture, so it’s silly to suppose that faithful Torah-obedient works are dead. The Scripture does not command dead works!
28. You wrote: “There is no teaching from Paul that mandates Torah obedience for believers.
My response: Wrong again. See #11 above…I could have listed dozens more considerations…but we’ll start with that.
29. I wrote: “Paul said those who obey the law will be justified (Rom. 2:13), AND Paul has Gentile believers OBEYING TORAH (Rom. 2:26) as a pointed rebuke against circumcised people who fail to obey it properly.”
You answered: “So what use for the Cross then? No need for Christ to be crucified and shed His Blood if it's all about faithfully obeying Torah, right? There would be no need for the Cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension and the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ. Yet those things did happen and are in place, rendering the Old Covenant obsolete.
Romans 2 is showing not how or that Torah Law can be kept, but that the Law stands against every person, Jew or Gentile. The chapter, read in context, proves that no one will be justified by the Law. Indeed, Romans 3:20 (cited above) confirms this!”
My response: I already refuted your Rom. 3:20 argument.
And, nothing you wrote disconfirms my position.
After all, faithful Torah-obedience entails acceptance of the Messiah (Dt. 18) who died on the Cross for us.
Therefore, faithful Torah-obedience does not oppose the cross.
Rather, faithful Torah-obedience REQUIRES acceptance of the Messiah and His apostles and ALL their Torah-obedient teachings which continue to uphold Torah for our proper observance.
Again: Paul said those who obey the law will be justified (Rom. 2:13), AND Paul has Gentile believers OBEYING TORAH (Rom. 2:26) as a pointed rebuke against circumcised people who fail to obey it properly.”
Sure, the Old Covenant is obsolete…but NOT yet passed away. (remember Heb. 8:13?)
So my position stands. You have failed to explain away Rom. 2:13 or Rom. 2:26, both of which disconfirm your position.
30. I wrote: “And what is "sin"? TORAH-DISOBEDIENCE (Rom. 3:20; 7:7).
Paul taught we should NOT sin (Rom. 6:15), which means we should NOT disobey Torah, which means we should OBEY TORAH!
So why oppose the Torah which Paul taught us to obey (through his command to "not sin")?”
You answered: “Whatever is not of faith is sin (from Rom. 14). And for those in Christ, when they do sin, whether from lack of faith or acting contrary to love (for love fulfills the parts of the Law that God still cares about, see Rom. 13), God is not counting our sins against us because where there is no law (because in Christ we've died to it, see Rom. 7:4-6), sin is not imputed (Rom. 4).
For you it seems to be all about sin; for God it's all about caring for and growing His children up into the maturity of who they are in Christ.”
My response: You argument hinges upon your incorrect interpretation of Romans 7 (again). I’ve already refuted that above.
Romans 13 never says that God only cares about certain parts of the law.
And, you wrote: “The more Christlike we become, the less sinning there is.”
My response: GOOD! Then the more Christ-like we become, the LESS WE DISOBEY TORAH (Rom. 3:20; 7:7).
Therefore, the more Christ-like we become, THE MORE WE OBEY TORAH!
Thank you. We agree!
So let’s sin less, obeying Torah more!
Yes!
31. I wrote: “We should love one another AS HE COMMANDED US (1 Jn. 3:23).
Therefore, Mt. 28:20 is STILL IN FORCE!
Mt. 28:20 applies all of Jesus' Torah-obedient PRE-CROSS teachings to disciples of all nations.”
You answered: “Sigh. You're beating a dead horse, BibleGuy. Mt. 28:20 does not cite the whole of Torah Law. If Jesus were stating that, He would have said to obey everything Moses commanded them.”
My response: But Jesus DID command EVERYTHING that Moses commanded!
Remember?
Jesus said we should obey greater AND lesser Torah portions (Mt. 23:23).
Jesus sent forth Torah-teachers (Gr. “Grammateus”, Mt. 23:34) to properly represent His Torah-obedient Torah-teaching ministry.
Jesus said Torah is not abolished until ALL is fulfilled (Mt. 5:17-20), and ALL is not yet fulfilled (e.g., Dt. 30:1-8).
Jesus said the Prophets are NOT abolished (Mt. 5:17), and the prophets require Torah.
Jesus said the Psalms are Scripture which can NOT be broken or set aside (Jn. 10). And the Psalms require Torah.
Jesus sends religious anti-Torah people AWAY from him (Mt. 7:21-23).
Jesus warns of a fiery fate for those who cause opposition to Torah (Mt. 13:41-42; Mt. 23:33).
Jesus said we should exhibit Torah-obedient works of righteousness greater than that of the Pharisees, or else we will not inherit the kingdom of God (Mt. 5:20).
Jesus said we LIVE by Torah (Mt. 4:4; Lk. 4:4).
Jesus said our Torah-teaching and Torah-obedience DETERMINES our position in the coming kingdom.
Jesus prayed we be sanctified by Torah (Jn. 17:17).
Jesus was ANGRY at religious people who used man-made traditions as an excuse to disobey Torah (Mk. 7:8-9).
Jesus expects His disciples to model His Torah-obedient walk of faith (Lk. 6:40; Mt. 10:24-25). John agrees (1 Jn. 2:6).
Jesus said Torah-obedience is a sufficient condition of eternal life (Lk. 10:25-28).
Jesus applied Dt. 6 to us (Mt. 22:37), which entails obedience to ALL Torah of Moses (Dt. 6:25).
I could go on and on and on…
Therefore, Jesus DID say we should obey everything commanded by Moses.
Thus, Mt. 28:20 requires that we TEACH (not oppose!) this to disciples of all nations.
32. You wrote: “I always love when I go to the Greek and find that God has so orchestrated the Gospel in such a fashion that it always, Always, ALWAYS is clear! The Greek for 'words' in Jn. 8:51 is 'logos' - not 'nomos' or 'graphe' (used for Torah or Scriptures).”
My response: I REALLY LOVE IT when people use the Biblical languages correctly.
Jesus uses LOGOS to refer to TORAH! (Mk. 7:8-13).
So let’s not pretend that “logos” somehow refers to Jesus (but not Torah).
And besides, Jesus (through His WORDS and His Spirit) points us to Torah anyway, as I’ve already shown.
Again, you’ve failed to engage this objection I’ve already previously raised against your position.
Sigh….
33. You wrote: “We don't imitate the Law-teaching Jesus…”
My response: WOW! Imagine Jesus teaching in the synagogue…and then JGIG stands up and says: “Behold, Jesus! I will NOT remain in these teachings of yours…because they will be canceled! These words of yours will NOT REMAIN IN ME!!”
Ouch…(Jn. 15:6)
Seriously…read Mt. 28:20 and obey it!
The PRE-CROSS teaching/commandment STILL APPLIES!
That’s the SAME Jesus who was crucified, risen, high priest, Christ, etc…
34. You quote Jn. 13:34.
My response: Great! Jesus loved us enough to show us HOW to obey Him in faith.
This requires faithful Torah-obedience (see #31 above).
Therefore, let us love one another with the faithful Torah-obedience Jesus requires that we exemplify as an expression of our love (Dt. 6:5,25; 1 Jn. 5:3; Jn. 14:15; Mt. 5:20).
CONCLUSION: You wrote: “Whether you will admit it or not, my position is well-defended using contextual Scripture with the Work and High Priesthood of Christ in full view.”
My response: Can you now defend your position against these 34 Scriptural objections I’ve raised?
Sure, Jesus Work and High Priesthood as Messiah is in full view. Awesome!
AND, He (and His apostles) taught us to obey Torah.
So can you defend your position against these 34 objections?
Blessings…
BibleGuy
18. You wrote: “You're trying to turn what is a covenant of Grace regarding Abraham into a covenant of Law - and it is nothing of the sort.”
My response: To the contrary…why do you resist acknowledging that God blessed Abraham BECAUSE (Heb. “akev”, Ge. 26:5) Abraham obeyed?
Therefore, Abraham was graciously granted righteousness by faith, AND God’s blessing to Abraham was given BECAUSE Abraham OBEYED (Ge. 26:5).
We should likewise imitate Abraham and be graciously granted righteousness by faith, AND share in the inheritance given to Abraham BECAUSE we likewise obey.
Why would you oppose this Scriptural fact regarding the faith and obedience of Abraham?
19. I say: “Why would you oppose Torah, when it is transferred directly into the New Covenant? (see "Torah", Jer. 31:33).”
You respond: “Since Jeremiah could not see the Work of the Cross from where he sat, God left it to the Apostles to clarify what His Law would be after the Cross: To believe on the One He sent and to love one another (1 Jn. 3:23-24).”
My response: Jeremiah ALREADY TOLD US that “TORAH” passes into the New Covenant (see “TORAH” in Jer. 31:33).
When Jeremiah uses “Torah” he is, of course, referring to the Torah of Moses.
If Jeremiah was prophesying of a new Torah that is anti-Mosaic-Torah, then Jeremiah would be a false prophet.
AND, you concede that the New Covenant is different than the Old, “because they broke my [old] covenant”.
Therefore, Mosaic Torah was broken in the Old Covenant, whereas (in the New Covenant) Mosaic Torah will NOT be broken!
Yes! Mosaic Torah will be written upon our hearts (Jer. 31:33) so that we will obey it (Dt. 30:14), as Paul FAVORABLY affirms (Rom. 10:8) that this is the Torah-obedient word of faith which he preached.
Furthermore, we should love one another AS HE COMMANDED US (1 Jn. 3:23).
Therefore, Mt. 28:20 is STILL IN FORCE!
Mt. 28:20 applies all of Jesus' Torah-obedient PRE-CROSS teachings to disciples of all nations.
So your appeal to 1 Jn. 3:23 leads us to Torah yet again!
Furthermore, the apostle Paul AGREES that Mosaic Torah is included in the New Covenant (see #11 above, for example).
20. You wrote: “Jesus was preaching the Law to those born under the Law before the Cross. After the Cross God's Law was to believe on the One He sent and for us to love one another… Torah obedience has ZERO to do with righteousness after the Cross. ZERO.”
My response: NO! After the cross, Jesus applied ALL of His pre-cross teachings to disciples of all nations! (Mt.28:20).
21. You wrote: “If you insist on obtaining/attaining righteousness through the Law, Paul is talking about you here…”
My response: I insist on Biblical Scripture! What does it say? We are righteous by faith (just like Abraham, Rom. 4), AND righteousness is something we DO (Gr. “poieo”, 1 Jn. 3:10, Mt. 5:20) or else we are NOT OF GOD!
I insist on both, per the Scriptures which require it.
Why can’t you admit that righteousness is also something we DO?
It doesn’t fit into your (incorrect) anti-Torah theology.
22. You wrote: “Paul recognized that though blameless under the Law, righteousness still was not obtained/attained.”
My response: No. Zacharias and Elizabeth WERE BOTH RIGHTEOUS IN THE SIGHT OF GOD! (Lk. 1:6)
I know it’s hard for you to believe…but they actually faithfully obeyed Torah, exemplifying works of righteousness blamelessly, as we should!
Sure, law-righteousness of our own (apart from faith) should be counted as loss (Php. 3:7), but FAITHFUL law-righteousness is required by both Paul AND Jesus!
STOP confusing the two!
23. You wrote: “No, the righteousness that comes from God (and is apart from the Law) is a gift, given when we put our faith in Christ!”
My response: AND Christ and His apostles teach us to faithfully obey Torah. So stop opposing it!
24. I wrote: “Again, Jesus said we live by Torah (Mt. 4:4; citing Dt. 8:3, referencing Torah). He never said it was impossible!”
You answered: “No, that's not what Christ said. The Greek there is 'rhema', not 'nomos', which is the Greek word used for 'Law' or 'Torah' in the NT. Heck, a case might even be made if the author had used the Greek 'graphe' which means written Scriptures, but he didn't, he used 'rhema', meaning spoken, leading word of God, not the written Scriptures of Torah.”
My response: I already refuted this! Sadly…you’ve not bothered to learn from my previous critique of your position.
Here we go again.
You wrongly claim that “rhema” does not refer to Torah.
Here’s proof (again!) that “rhema” refers to Torah.
READ Dt. 8:3 in the LXX! Guess what? It’s RHEMA! Yes, “rhema” is used to refer to the word of God in Dt. 8:3, which in turn is simply referencing the Torah of Moses.
Therefore, Jesus’ quotation of Dt. 8:3 (Mt. 4:4) is ANOTHER proof that Jesus expects us to LIVE by Torah (not pretend it is abolished!)
Likewise, “rhema” refers to Torah in Dt. 30:14 LXX, and Paul uses this same “rhema” at Rom. 10:8, where Paul FAVORABLY affirms that the Torah-obedient Dt. 30:14 context IS the substance of the word of faith which Paul preaches.
AND, Mt. 28:20 requires that we teach this to disciples of all nations (even though JGIG does not want you to do that).
So let’s learn how to use the Biblical languages better.
“Rhema” can refer to “Torah”.
Stop misleading people.
25. I wrote: “Again, Moses said Torah-obedience is NOT too difficult (Dt. 30:11), thereby confirming that we CAN walk in Torah-obedient righteousness per Dt. 6:25.
Did Jesus say: "Hey guys....read Dt. 6:4-5 BUT IGNORE THE CONTEXT!"
Of course not! Therefore, you can't cut Dt. 6:4-5 out of the Torah and impose a foreign meaning upon it simply to accommodate your anti-Torah theology.
Jesus APPLIED Dt. 6 to YOU (Mt. 22:37), context and all.”
You answered: “Yet you ignore the big fat IF in Deut. 6:25 (you know, part of the context of that passage).”
My response: Sure, some people obey Torah, others don’t.
Nevertheless, my position remains. Jesus applied Dt. 6 to YOU (context and all).
And Moses said you CAN obey Torah, because it is NOT too difficult (Dt. 30:11).
Paul AGREES (transferring that very passage into Rom. 10:8 where Paul tells us that this IS the word of faith he preached).
26. I wrote: “In fact, Jesus said Torah-obedience is a sufficient condition of eternal life (Lk. 10:25-28), again disconfirming your position.”
You answered: “And Jesus also pointed out to each and every one who claimed they kept the Law exactly where they fell short. Again, Jesus preached the Law to those born under the Law. He was telling them, "Here is the Law, but not the watered down Law you've been taught - here's the full weight of what the Law requires", and NO ONE could measure up. That was the point!”
My response: No! Zacharias and Elizabeth were both RIGHTEOUS AND BLAMELESS IN ALL THE COMMANDS of Torah (Lk. 1:6). I think you forgot that one again…
Sure, Zacharias and Elizabeth were not SINLESS…but the Torah has provision for sin built into it. And this points us to the need for a permanent once-for-all sacrifice to permanently take away sins. But that’s no excuse to disobey Torah! Thus, Zacharias and Elizabeth CONTINUED to be Righteous and Blameless in Torah-obedience, even though they were human beings who had sinned.
Jesus never said that you can not faithfully obey Torah like Zacharias and Elizabeth.
Sure, we are not righteous in God’s sight by works of the law without faith (Rom. 3:20), but that’s no excuse to fail to exemplify FAITHFUL works of the law.
27. You wrote: “Whether you have faith or not when 'doing' the Law, they are dead works.”
My response: No! Faith without works is dead (Jas. 2:17). Works without faith is also bad (Gal. 5:4-5). Therefore we need BOTH faith AND works! Thus, faithful Torah-obedient works are not dead, because they exhibit both faith AND works, thus they are NOT subject to the “deadness” of Jas. 2:17 (which only applies if works are absent from “faith”).
And, faithful Torah-obedience is commanded throughout Scripture, so it’s silly to suppose that faithful Torah-obedient works are dead. The Scripture does not command dead works!
28. You wrote: “There is no teaching from Paul that mandates Torah obedience for believers.
My response: Wrong again. See #11 above…I could have listed dozens more considerations…but we’ll start with that.
29. I wrote: “Paul said those who obey the law will be justified (Rom. 2:13), AND Paul has Gentile believers OBEYING TORAH (Rom. 2:26) as a pointed rebuke against circumcised people who fail to obey it properly.”
You answered: “So what use for the Cross then? No need for Christ to be crucified and shed His Blood if it's all about faithfully obeying Torah, right? There would be no need for the Cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension and the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ. Yet those things did happen and are in place, rendering the Old Covenant obsolete.
Romans 2 is showing not how or that Torah Law can be kept, but that the Law stands against every person, Jew or Gentile. The chapter, read in context, proves that no one will be justified by the Law. Indeed, Romans 3:20 (cited above) confirms this!”
My response: I already refuted your Rom. 3:20 argument.
And, nothing you wrote disconfirms my position.
After all, faithful Torah-obedience entails acceptance of the Messiah (Dt. 18) who died on the Cross for us.
Therefore, faithful Torah-obedience does not oppose the cross.
Rather, faithful Torah-obedience REQUIRES acceptance of the Messiah and His apostles and ALL their Torah-obedient teachings which continue to uphold Torah for our proper observance.
Again: Paul said those who obey the law will be justified (Rom. 2:13), AND Paul has Gentile believers OBEYING TORAH (Rom. 2:26) as a pointed rebuke against circumcised people who fail to obey it properly.”
Sure, the Old Covenant is obsolete…but NOT yet passed away. (remember Heb. 8:13?)
So my position stands. You have failed to explain away Rom. 2:13 or Rom. 2:26, both of which disconfirm your position.
30. I wrote: “And what is "sin"? TORAH-DISOBEDIENCE (Rom. 3:20; 7:7).
Paul taught we should NOT sin (Rom. 6:15), which means we should NOT disobey Torah, which means we should OBEY TORAH!
So why oppose the Torah which Paul taught us to obey (through his command to "not sin")?”
You answered: “Whatever is not of faith is sin (from Rom. 14). And for those in Christ, when they do sin, whether from lack of faith or acting contrary to love (for love fulfills the parts of the Law that God still cares about, see Rom. 13), God is not counting our sins against us because where there is no law (because in Christ we've died to it, see Rom. 7:4-6), sin is not imputed (Rom. 4).
For you it seems to be all about sin; for God it's all about caring for and growing His children up into the maturity of who they are in Christ.”
My response: You argument hinges upon your incorrect interpretation of Romans 7 (again). I’ve already refuted that above.
Romans 13 never says that God only cares about certain parts of the law.
And, you wrote: “The more Christlike we become, the less sinning there is.”
My response: GOOD! Then the more Christ-like we become, the LESS WE DISOBEY TORAH (Rom. 3:20; 7:7).
Therefore, the more Christ-like we become, THE MORE WE OBEY TORAH!
Thank you. We agree!
So let’s sin less, obeying Torah more!
Yes!
31. I wrote: “We should love one another AS HE COMMANDED US (1 Jn. 3:23).
Therefore, Mt. 28:20 is STILL IN FORCE!
Mt. 28:20 applies all of Jesus' Torah-obedient PRE-CROSS teachings to disciples of all nations.”
You answered: “Sigh. You're beating a dead horse, BibleGuy. Mt. 28:20 does not cite the whole of Torah Law. If Jesus were stating that, He would have said to obey everything Moses commanded them.”
My response: But Jesus DID command EVERYTHING that Moses commanded!
Remember?
Jesus said we should obey greater AND lesser Torah portions (Mt. 23:23).
Jesus sent forth Torah-teachers (Gr. “Grammateus”, Mt. 23:34) to properly represent His Torah-obedient Torah-teaching ministry.
Jesus said Torah is not abolished until ALL is fulfilled (Mt. 5:17-20), and ALL is not yet fulfilled (e.g., Dt. 30:1-8).
Jesus said the Prophets are NOT abolished (Mt. 5:17), and the prophets require Torah.
Jesus said the Psalms are Scripture which can NOT be broken or set aside (Jn. 10). And the Psalms require Torah.
Jesus sends religious anti-Torah people AWAY from him (Mt. 7:21-23).
Jesus warns of a fiery fate for those who cause opposition to Torah (Mt. 13:41-42; Mt. 23:33).
Jesus said we should exhibit Torah-obedient works of righteousness greater than that of the Pharisees, or else we will not inherit the kingdom of God (Mt. 5:20).
Jesus said we LIVE by Torah (Mt. 4:4; Lk. 4:4).
Jesus said our Torah-teaching and Torah-obedience DETERMINES our position in the coming kingdom.
Jesus prayed we be sanctified by Torah (Jn. 17:17).
Jesus was ANGRY at religious people who used man-made traditions as an excuse to disobey Torah (Mk. 7:8-9).
Jesus expects His disciples to model His Torah-obedient walk of faith (Lk. 6:40; Mt. 10:24-25). John agrees (1 Jn. 2:6).
Jesus said Torah-obedience is a sufficient condition of eternal life (Lk. 10:25-28).
Jesus applied Dt. 6 to us (Mt. 22:37), which entails obedience to ALL Torah of Moses (Dt. 6:25).
I could go on and on and on…
Therefore, Jesus DID say we should obey everything commanded by Moses.
Thus, Mt. 28:20 requires that we TEACH (not oppose!) this to disciples of all nations.
32. You wrote: “I always love when I go to the Greek and find that God has so orchestrated the Gospel in such a fashion that it always, Always, ALWAYS is clear! The Greek for 'words' in Jn. 8:51 is 'logos' - not 'nomos' or 'graphe' (used for Torah or Scriptures).”
My response: I REALLY LOVE IT when people use the Biblical languages correctly.
Jesus uses LOGOS to refer to TORAH! (Mk. 7:8-13).
So let’s not pretend that “logos” somehow refers to Jesus (but not Torah).
And besides, Jesus (through His WORDS and His Spirit) points us to Torah anyway, as I’ve already shown.
Again, you’ve failed to engage this objection I’ve already previously raised against your position.
Sigh….
33. You wrote: “We don't imitate the Law-teaching Jesus…”
My response: WOW! Imagine Jesus teaching in the synagogue…and then JGIG stands up and says: “Behold, Jesus! I will NOT remain in these teachings of yours…because they will be canceled! These words of yours will NOT REMAIN IN ME!!”
Ouch…(Jn. 15:6)
Seriously…read Mt. 28:20 and obey it!
The PRE-CROSS teaching/commandment STILL APPLIES!
That’s the SAME Jesus who was crucified, risen, high priest, Christ, etc…
34. You quote Jn. 13:34.
My response: Great! Jesus loved us enough to show us HOW to obey Him in faith.
This requires faithful Torah-obedience (see #31 above).
Therefore, let us love one another with the faithful Torah-obedience Jesus requires that we exemplify as an expression of our love (Dt. 6:5,25; 1 Jn. 5:3; Jn. 14:15; Mt. 5:20).
CONCLUSION: You wrote: “Whether you will admit it or not, my position is well-defended using contextual Scripture with the Work and High Priesthood of Christ in full view.”
My response: Can you now defend your position against these 34 Scriptural objections I’ve raised?
Sure, Jesus Work and High Priesthood as Messiah is in full view. Awesome!
AND, He (and His apostles) taught us to obey Torah.
So can you defend your position against these 34 objections?
Blessings…
BibleGuy
Thanks even though I am biased to my own opinions I think it speaks volumes.
Seeing no man can serve two masters(impossible) perhaps we should ask our brother the BibleGuy which Torah will a person serve . The Torah of Bondage or the Torah of Liberty ?
Or another example that comes to mind of the bride of Christ. The bondmaid or the freewoman...?
Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all Gal 4:21
Seeing no man can serve two masters(impossible) perhaps we should ask our brother the BibleGuy which Torah will a person serve . The Torah of Bondage or the Torah of Liberty ?
Or another example that comes to mind of the bride of Christ. The bondmaid or the freewoman...?
Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all Gal 4:21
All will be answered in time in the Dear 'BibleGuy' thread.
Some of the questions you asked in the 34 points have already been answered in the 24 issues you raised. Working my way through.
You'll just have to be patient.
Oh - any further interaction with me will need to be on the Dear 'BibleGuy' thread. That way you and others will know when your questions have been answered and you won't have to keep posting them over and over again in various threads, claiming they haven't been answered. You kind of did that here, by the way - not addressing my response to you, but simply reposting (copy/pasting) the same pile of questions I haven't gotten to yet.
You did mix in some responses, and I'll get to them . . . on the other thread. I don't like hijacking established threads, so again, take your 'issues' and 'points' to the other thread.
But for heaven's sake, take the time to read through the thread first! Lots of answers to what your challenges are already!
Here's the intro to the Dear 'BibleGuy' thread. There are few requested ground rules - for a guy who claims to keep Torah Law, these should be cake:
Dear 'BibleGuy',
So BibleGuy - your individual posts have so many random points that one cannot comprehensively reply to each of your points without exceeding the 20,000 character limit per post here at CC.
I thought it would be a good idea to answer in a thread dedicated to your assertions, instead of folks seeing you post your assertions here and there and perhaps missing the responses that refute them. Feel free to participate here or not. As I have time and see your posts, I can always quote them here (or you can put them here yourself) and respond to them.
We've talked about bantering in the forums, and as my time is limited, I've not been able to dive in. This week I may have a bit of time, however, and instead of having my time and efforts buried in threads elsewhere, I thought it would be prudent for us and for any readers here who are interested in the concept of Torah obedience for Christians to see our discourse in a separate thread which they can choose to read or ignore.
I will request, if you choose to post in this thread, that you pare your posts down to one or two points, or at least a single train of thought without pontificating at length about your entire belief system in each post.
This is a discussion - a going back and forth. I know from seasoned experience with Torah folk that the tendency is for them to go on and on and on, throwing a wall of Scripture references pulled out of context with their interpretation to 'prove' their position. That method operates from a weak position, not being able to develop support for their beliefs using contextual Scripture showing how the asserted point is supported.
While I appreciate the organized layout of your posts (numbered points), most will skip right over your posts and lengthy responses to them because they are just too darn long.
I've also noticed that you say the same thing over and over, citing but not posting Scripture, assuming that folks will just swallow your interpretation for the out of context references that you put out there.
So, for the random, brave reader who chooses to climb this mountain, following is a first example of our interactions, and this will serve as a thread where BibleGuy can bring his assertions that I've not had the chance to respond to in other threads if he likes.
Here's the link to the thread:
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/137844-dear-bibleguy.html
The big advantage to having that thread is that when my time gets limited again (and after this week we have two very busy weeks at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital), there will always be a thread where we can both go to see where the discussion is, and I'll be able to poke my head in the door as time allows.
One more thing: I'm not here to argue with you. I'm here to defend the simple Truths of the Gospel.
I won't demand that you agree with me, I'll simply state my case and am content to let God and the reader judge between us. If you continue to misrepresent what I clearly say, I'll point that out, but as a means of clarification, not as a point of argument.
Grace and peace,
-JGIG
Some of the questions you asked in the 34 points have already been answered in the 24 issues you raised. Working my way through.
You'll just have to be patient.
Oh - any further interaction with me will need to be on the Dear 'BibleGuy' thread. That way you and others will know when your questions have been answered and you won't have to keep posting them over and over again in various threads, claiming they haven't been answered. You kind of did that here, by the way - not addressing my response to you, but simply reposting (copy/pasting) the same pile of questions I haven't gotten to yet.
You did mix in some responses, and I'll get to them . . . on the other thread. I don't like hijacking established threads, so again, take your 'issues' and 'points' to the other thread.
But for heaven's sake, take the time to read through the thread first! Lots of answers to what your challenges are already!
Here's the intro to the Dear 'BibleGuy' thread. There are few requested ground rules - for a guy who claims to keep Torah Law, these should be cake:
Dear 'BibleGuy',
So BibleGuy - your individual posts have so many random points that one cannot comprehensively reply to each of your points without exceeding the 20,000 character limit per post here at CC.
I thought it would be a good idea to answer in a thread dedicated to your assertions, instead of folks seeing you post your assertions here and there and perhaps missing the responses that refute them. Feel free to participate here or not. As I have time and see your posts, I can always quote them here (or you can put them here yourself) and respond to them.
We've talked about bantering in the forums, and as my time is limited, I've not been able to dive in. This week I may have a bit of time, however, and instead of having my time and efforts buried in threads elsewhere, I thought it would be prudent for us and for any readers here who are interested in the concept of Torah obedience for Christians to see our discourse in a separate thread which they can choose to read or ignore.
I will request, if you choose to post in this thread, that you pare your posts down to one or two points, or at least a single train of thought without pontificating at length about your entire belief system in each post.
This is a discussion - a going back and forth. I know from seasoned experience with Torah folk that the tendency is for them to go on and on and on, throwing a wall of Scripture references pulled out of context with their interpretation to 'prove' their position. That method operates from a weak position, not being able to develop support for their beliefs using contextual Scripture showing how the asserted point is supported.
While I appreciate the organized layout of your posts (numbered points), most will skip right over your posts and lengthy responses to them because they are just too darn long.
I've also noticed that you say the same thing over and over, citing but not posting Scripture, assuming that folks will just swallow your interpretation for the out of context references that you put out there.
So, for the random, brave reader who chooses to climb this mountain, following is a first example of our interactions, and this will serve as a thread where BibleGuy can bring his assertions that I've not had the chance to respond to in other threads if he likes.
Here's the link to the thread:
http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/137844-dear-bibleguy.html
The big advantage to having that thread is that when my time gets limited again (and after this week we have two very busy weeks at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital), there will always be a thread where we can both go to see where the discussion is, and I'll be able to poke my head in the door as time allows.
One more thing: I'm not here to argue with you. I'm here to defend the simple Truths of the Gospel.
I won't demand that you agree with me, I'll simply state my case and am content to let God and the reader judge between us. If you continue to misrepresent what I clearly say, I'll point that out, but as a means of clarification, not as a point of argument.
Grace and peace,
-JGIG
Troll?
I'm just challenging you to justify your claim (using Scripture) that proves that "priest" = "pastor".
For example, "hieurus" is Greek for "priest.
And, "pastor" in Greek is...well...I'm not even sure which word you think is "pastor" in Greek.
You can't just ASSUME "priest" = "pastor"...we need PROOF.
I'm looking for BIBLICAL evidence (which you've not provided).
And, apparently you don't have any.
best...
BibleGuy
I'm just challenging you to justify your claim (using Scripture) that proves that "priest" = "pastor".
For example, "hieurus" is Greek for "priest.
And, "pastor" in Greek is...well...I'm not even sure which word you think is "pastor" in Greek.
You can't just ASSUME "priest" = "pastor"...we need PROOF.
I'm looking for BIBLICAL evidence (which you've not provided).
And, apparently you don't have any.
best...
BibleGuy
Perhaps the sacrifices serve for the partial hardening of Isreal until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. 'Then all Isreal will be saved.'
I only got to page six in here so far, not sure if I need to read more. Lol.
So far I haven't found, or looked real hard for a sure definition of dispensation except that it is a new period of time that God reveals a new truth for people to follow.
I only got to page six in here so far, not sure if I need to read more. Lol.
So far I haven't found, or looked real hard for a sure definition of dispensation except that it is a new period of time that God reveals a new truth for people to follow.
The first century reformation came, the order has been established as the new order of priests. It is in respect to all believers as a kingdom of priest, male and female, Jew and Gentile alike. If you are a believer or think you have believed unto the salvation of our soul it makes you eligible . If not like Arron's sons you will perish showing your unbelief, no faith .
If you follow the workings of the first century refomation you have a pattern for any refomation to include the fifteenth century refomation or what some call a revival to today . The Bible, God 's law book is the one source of refomation in any generation.
If you follow the workings of the first century refomation you have a pattern for any refomation to include the fifteenth century refomation or what some call a revival to today . The Bible, God 's law book is the one source of refomation in any generation.
I have asked before but I will ask again. Why was Moses the giver of the Torah not permitted to enter the promised land?
What does the parable in respect to striking a rock with a rod twice have to do with the law typified by Moses not entering the promised land mean. What is the spiritual significance of that parable ?
What does the parable in respect to striking a rock with a rod twice have to do with the law typified by Moses not entering the promised land mean. What is the spiritual significance of that parable ?
Understood. I'm not unfamiliar with the theory.
But the sacrifices God requires in the New Covenant are sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving from His Living Body, not dead animals on an altar. Also, the commemoration of the Sacrifice of Christ was given by Christ Himself - at the Last Supper. We commemorate - remember - His Work in the bread and the wine, not by offering sacrifices at an altar.
And since Christ's Priesthood is in eternal effect by an oath from God, the Old Covenant Priesthood is not coming back to officiate over sacrifices offered on an altar in a rebuilt temple. If man decides to do it anyway, it will not be sanctioned by God and will be an abomination and insult to the Work and High Priesthood of Christ, putting Him to shame.
No, any animal sacrifices are out, in light of the High Priesthood of Christ, Who is the ONLY Priest/Priesthood recognized by God in the New Covenant and Who is not legally able to oversee animal sacrifices required by the Law. Again, the Old Covenant is NOT coming back - Christ's Priesthood is PERMANENT by a OATH from God.
Couple that with NO animal sacrificial system in the New Covenant and you can see where I don't see how the Dispensational model is workable when considering the Permanent, Perfect High Priesthood of Christ (not to mention His once-for-all, for-all-time sacrifice).
The letter to the Hebrews is extremely clear on these points
.
-JGIG
But the sacrifices God requires in the New Covenant are sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving from His Living Body, not dead animals on an altar. Also, the commemoration of the Sacrifice of Christ was given by Christ Himself - at the Last Supper. We commemorate - remember - His Work in the bread and the wine, not by offering sacrifices at an altar.
And since Christ's Priesthood is in eternal effect by an oath from God, the Old Covenant Priesthood is not coming back to officiate over sacrifices offered on an altar in a rebuilt temple. If man decides to do it anyway, it will not be sanctioned by God and will be an abomination and insult to the Work and High Priesthood of Christ, putting Him to shame.
No, any animal sacrifices are out, in light of the High Priesthood of Christ, Who is the ONLY Priest/Priesthood recognized by God in the New Covenant and Who is not legally able to oversee animal sacrifices required by the Law. Again, the Old Covenant is NOT coming back - Christ's Priesthood is PERMANENT by a OATH from God.
Couple that with NO animal sacrificial system in the New Covenant and you can see where I don't see how the Dispensational model is workable when considering the Permanent, Perfect High Priesthood of Christ (not to mention His once-for-all, for-all-time sacrifice).
The letter to the Hebrews is extremely clear on these points
.-JGIG
Could you please show where in Hebrews the sacrifices are not coming back? I am sort of a novice in the word so I am not arguing but asking if that disproves my speculation above. I wonder if the writer was talking only to those in Christ . I'm not going to read thru Hebrews right now.
Thanks.
Last edited:
My understanding of dispensationalism is that God reveals parts of Himself in different ways and at different times. But what I find wrong with many is the belief that while God is focusing on one aspect of His personality, all the other aspects cease or become moot. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. So even tho He focusses on one aspect, it doesn't mean that everything else about Him goes to the wayside.
