Departure From Oblivion!

[shotgunner]

This has been previously addressed. this post Focus on the changing of the Administrator of the New Covenant, not the Covenant alone without the Mediator. This scripture you quote is focusing on the difference of the Priest that administrates the Word of God within the Covenant.

I think you misunderstand what the new covenant is. The new covenant agrees with the old as far as what is righteous but under the new covenant Christ is the sacrifice that has been made for the breaking of the law. Christ is the one who has kept the law and been judged righteous. We are the ones who get the benefit of it based on our immersion into Christ. We become one with Christ. He gets our sin, we get his righteousness.

No longer are we to judge ourselves based on how well we can keep the law. Christ has kept the law for us. Christ in us is our hope of Glory.

I don't have any problem with the law, just don't use it to determine your relationship with God. We are to put our faith in Jesus and him alone. That doesn't mean however that we then become law breakers. The Spirit within us leads into righteous living.

I actually don't need to even study the law or know all it's precepts. All I really have to do is to love God and love my neighbor as myself and I will keep every law. The Holy Spirit will show me when I have done something wrong.

 

[just-us-2]

I actually don't need to even study the law or know all it's precepts. All I really have to do is to love God and love my neighbor as myself and I will keep every law. The Holy Spirit will show me when I have done something wrong.

I know you weren't addressing me and please pardon me for butting in here, but you said something I can't figure out and would like it explained. If you don't need to study the law or know its precepts, what do you do with 2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV)
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."?

 

[atwhatcost]

I've thought about it for a time and I still see a return to the Law as a regression, not a revival. It would be to return to the inadequacy of the old Mosaic covenant of law and a rejection of the complete sufficiency of the New Covenant of grace.

To say the covenant was inadequate is to say all 365 peace treaties with Native Americans were inadequate. (A covenant and a treaty are the same word.) It's unfair and just wrong. Someone broke them. Doesn't make the treaty/covenant wrong, makes the breaker a liar and a cheat.

The OT wasn't inadequate. It is downright perfect -- right down to the jots and tittles even today. Someone broke it. Whoever broke it was a liar and a cheat. Who broke it? Every conceived person ever! We all broke it. God did not. It was perfect.

It had one flaw -- Man. Man can't keep up with God, even if we try. Apart from him, we don't even try. A bit iffy how much we try with him.

The covenant of God with Israel was a temporary covenant of Law. It was, by divine design, planned for obsolescence. It was provisional, preliminary, to prepare man for what God was to do through His Son...the "better covenant" (Heb. 7:22, 8:6) that is personified in the Person of Jesus Christ.

You're right. It was temporary, just like every peace treaty with Native Americans. It was temporary, not because it's not important, but because we broke it. God knew we'd break it. He gave it to prove there was no other way to him but through Christ -- which just happens to be the exact same covenant as before, except for one major thing. Sure enough, he proved it. We screwed/screw up. It is not the fault of the treaty maker. So God got the treaty breaker out of the way and made it with the only one who would and could keep it -- God!

So stop blaming it on the treaty maker. Blame it on the treaty breaker. Then bring it back to the treaty maker and keeper. Because it's still the same treaty, still what God wants, but we've been given the only way to do it right -- God!

 

[shotgunner]

I know you weren't addressing me and please pardon me for butting in here, but you said something I can't figure out and would like it explained. If you don't need to study the law or know its precepts, what do you do with 2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV)
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."?

That's fine my friend. I don't mind answering. Let me start by asking you a couple of question and then I will explain even more if you wish.

When Paul spoke those words to Timothy, considering all Paul has said elsewhere, do you think that he was telling Timothy to teach all of the law? Was Paul telling Timothy to study the law so that he could teach the law?

Secondly, if Paul was speaking of only the law to Timothy, what part of it was he to divide?

 

[jamie26301]

That is a common reaction to the uneducated pertaining to the "law" though - I have often been accused of wanting to be back "under" the law and supposedly want to kill sheep for blood sacrifices. It just doesn't apply! But I think I will continue to post some sensible explanations to enlighten those who desire to truly learn and don't automatically dismiss what they don't know anything about as being worthless.

So do you eat pork?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but what do you mean about returning to the Law?... like you said, most scholars and Christians consider the Law the 613 rules of Moses. And James seems to indicate that the laws are all or nothing. "Break one, you have broken them all."

I didn't read the thread, so you can point me to a post # if already stated, but if by returning to the Law you mean righteous living manifested to others (reflecting this perfect picture the Law shows us), then how do you choose what to go by as obeying God - if not the whole thing?

Why is it that dietary commands just don't apply? (assuming you consider them not to)

I do not remember Jesus saying we are to reject the Law, or forget it... after all, on more than one occasion He told people to keep it ("show yourself to the priest", for example) but I'm just curious how you differentiate these.

 

[jamie26301]

That's fine my friend. I don't mind answering. Let me start by asking you a couple of question and then I will explain even more if you wish.

When Paul spoke those words to Timothy, considering all Paul has said elsewhere, do you think that he was telling Timothy to teach all of the law? Was Paul telling Timothy to study the law so that he could teach the law?

Secondly, if Paul was speaking of only the law to Timothy, what part of it was he to divide?

Wow, this is wonderfully thought-provoking! I hadn't thought of this angle before.

 

[FreeNChrist]

To say the covenant was inadequate is to say all 365 peace treaties with Native Americans were inadequate. (A covenant and a treaty are the same word.) It's unfair and just wrong. Someone broke them. Doesn't make the treaty/covenant wrong, makes the breaker a liar and a cheat.

The OT wasn't inadequate. It is downright perfect -- right down to the jots and tittles even today. Someone broke it. Whoever broke it was a liar and a cheat. Who broke it? Every conceived person ever! We all broke it. God did not. It was perfect.

It had one flaw -- Man. Man can't keep up with God, even if we try. Apart from him, we don't even try. A bit iffy how much we try with him.



You're right. It was temporary, just like every peace treaty with Native Americans. It was temporary, not because it's not important, but because we broke it. God knew we'd break it. He gave it to prove there was no other way to him but through Christ -- which just happens to be the exact same covenant as before, except for one major thing. Sure enough, he proved it. We screwed/screw up. It is not the fault of the treaty maker. So God got the treaty breaker out of the way and made it with the only one who would and could keep it -- God!

So stop blaming it on the treaty maker. Blame it on the treaty breaker. Then bring it back to the treaty maker and keeper. Because it's still the same treaty, still what God wants, but we've been given the only way to do it right -- God!

I suggest you study Hebrews more carefully and take a chill pill.

 

[just-me]

I think you misunderstand what the new covenant is. The new covenant agrees with the old as far as what is righteous but under the new covenant Christ is the sacrifice that has been made for the breaking of the law. Christ is the one who has kept the law and been judged righteous. We are the ones who get the benefit of it based on our immersion into Christ. We become one with Christ. He gets our sin, we get his righteousness.

No longer are we to judge ourselves based on how well we can keep the law. Christ has kept the law for us. Christ in us is our hope of Glory.

I don't have any problem with the law, just don't use it to determine your relationship with God. We are to put our faith in Jesus and him alone. That doesn't mean however that we then become law breakers. The Spirit within us leads into righteous living.

I actually don't need to even study the law or know all it's precepts. All I really have to do is to love God and love my neighbor as myself and I will keep every law. The Holy Spirit will show me when I have done something wrong.

I see 2 parts of the law (Torah)
1. The Levitical Priesthood that was fulfilled in Christ by His sacrifice, totally I might add, and we can agree on that part I'm sure. I think that the the entire book of Hebrews is explaining this to us.
2. There is an unchanging law that has been given by an unchanging God that is administered to God's children by the priesthood. This (as #1 explains) has a New Mediator of the same laws given to Israel. This is something that we differ on I'm afraid, but we must take into account that we "live" in Christ and we 'live by every word of God' whether old or new, as it is defined.
3. Jesus fulfilled the law, but fulfilling is the direct opposite of destroying it as Jesus said "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." (Matthew 5:17b)
4. We have an obligation to also fulfill our part because we love His commandments, and they are clearly not different from His Father's.

Let's just take one simple example of the law concerning the feast of tabernacles. It becomes fascinating to understand more about the nature of God, and motives of our Lord Jesus Christ because He is the Creator of all things. I'll just mention one small part of a multitude of things in the law that reveal to us God's divine nature (for a lack of another term).

1[SUP]st[/SUP] day of the feast is the 15[SUP]th[/SUP] of the 7th month (Numbers 29:12-13)
[SUP]12 [/SUP]And on the fifteenth day of the seventh month ye shall have an holy convocation; ye shall do no servile work, and ye shall keep a feast unto the LORD seven days:
[SUP]13 [/SUP]And ye shall offer a burnt offering, a sacrifice made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD; thirteen young bullocks, two rams, and fourteen lambs of the first year; they shall be without blemish:

So why thirteen bullocks, and what does thirteen represent? Finding the relationship of numbers to the Hebrew language, we can see a relationship of the 15th day of the month, the 13 bullocks, the 1st day of the feast, and the 7th month. I won't go into what the bullocks represent at this time but that is also profound IMO.

The 1st letter of the Hebrew aleph beyt, means strong powerful leader. Our holy Father in heaven planned these chronological events before they were instituted to mankind, and the number 1 is the first day of the “Feast of Tabernacles” representing unity, and new beginnings. (John 3:7)

Obviously the number 13 (number of bullocks) is prevalent representing “Apostasy, depravity, rebellion.
The 13[SUP]th[/SUP] letter of the Hebrew aleph beyt means chaos, water, and blood that are mighty. This is another confirmation of sacrifice for the atonement and remission of sin in the New Covenant of Christ Jesus.
The law entered because of transgression. (Galatians 3:19)

The number 15 (the day of the month) represents rest. The pictorial Hebrew 15th letter (shemech) is a picture of a thorn meaning to grab, hate, and protect.
The believer in Christ Jesus enters into His rest, ceasing from his own works, and is protected from those things God the Father detests. (Hebrews 4:10)

The 7th letter of the Hebrew (Zayin) is a picture of a mattock relating to the parable of the sower and the seed. Obviously the seed grows and produces fuit depending on the condition of the soil. This is a representation (foreshadowing) of the resurrection, spiritual completeness (fulfillment), and the Fathers perfection. (Isaiah 53:5)

We can relate all this to what Jesus carried in His body while on the cross of Calvary. This gives me a greater appreciation for God's enormous grace toward us, by His law and prophets completed but not destroyed through Christ Jesus. How about you? His word (all of them) reveal His character. The Spirit and the Word work together in coordination with each other in every respect.

 

[just-me]

That's fine my friend. I don't mind answering. Let me start by asking you a couple of question and then I will explain even more if you wish.

When Paul spoke those words to Timothy, considering all Paul has said elsewhere, do you think that he was telling Timothy to teach all of the law? Was Paul telling Timothy to study the law so that he could teach the law?

Secondly, if Paul was speaking of only the law to Timothy, what part of it was he to divide?

just-us-2 forgive me if I am being too bold.
If I may, Paul taught the right way to observe the law of God. Many abused it such as the self righteous Pharisees which Jesus confronted, but Jesus didn't tell them to neglect it. Just the opposite. (Matthew 23:23)

Paul instructed Timothy, and Paul made it clear how he worshiped God in Christ also. (Acts 24:14) So yes I'm sure Paul instructed Timothy to teach the law the right way, along with the risen Messiah, and the ushering/grafting in of the Gentiles to the kingdom of God according to the New covenant. But before teaching it, Timothy needed to study it. Timothy also needed to be coached on how to govern according to the position he was elected to fulfill.

After all this, what we have as the New Testament writings wasn't available yet, but they did have what we know as the Old Testament writings.

 

[shotgunner]

Just-me

Yes, I too love the significance of the ritual as it pertains to the perfection of Christ. My point is not that we are to throw away everything except the NT. My Point is that we are to rightly divide it.

You would surly agree that none of the ritual you just expounded on is necessary knowledge for either salvation or a fulfilling Christian life. Interesting yes, just not completely necessary.

I am not at all advocating ignorance, quite the opposite. Studying all the OT is fine but only if you completely understand the NT and new covenant, seeing that the NT is only a shadow and partial truth of the full measure revealed in the NT.

The only thing I ever have a problem with is the weight some give to the law. It seems that some wish to live by it using it as a means to either measure their righteousness or to attain righteousness. That my friend is grievous error. The law was only ever meant as a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.

 

[shotgunner]

Paul instructed Timothy, and Paul made it clear how he worshiped God in Christ also. (Acts 24:14) So yes I'm sure Paul instructed Timothy to teach the law the right way and before teaching it, Timothy needed to study it. After all what we have as the New Testament writings wasn't available yet, but they did have what we know as the Old Testament writings.

So you honestly think that Paul instructed Timothy to teach the law, and not the new revelation that Jesus is the Christ? If Timothy was to know any law it was only to the extent that he could expound on the difference between the old and new covenant as Paul did in Hebrews.

 

[gb9]

Just-me

Yes, I too love the significance of the ritual as it pertains to the perfection of Christ. My point is not that we are to throw away everything except the NT. My Point is that we are to rightly divide it.

You would surly agree that none of the ritual you just expounded on is necessary knowledge for either salvation or a fulfilling Christian life. Interesting yes, just not completely necessary.

I am not at all advocating ignorance, quite the opposite. Studying all the OT is fine but only if you completely understand the NT and new covenant, seeing that the NT is only a shadow and partial truth of the full measure revealed in the NT.

The only thing I ever have a problem with is the weight some give to the law. It seems that some wish to live by it using it as a means to either measure their righteousness or to attain righteousness. That my friend is grievous error. The law was only ever meant as a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.

exactly. good post. why folks cannot understand clear Scripture is just baffling.

 

[just-us-2]

So do you eat pork?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but what do you mean about returning to the Law?... like you said, most scholars and Christians consider the Law the 613 rules of Moses. And James seems to indicate that the laws are all or nothing. "Break one, you have broken them all."

I didn't read the thread, so you can point me to a post # if already stated, but if by returning to the Law you mean righteous living manifested to others (reflecting this perfect picture the Law shows us), then how do you choose what to go by as obeying God - if not the whole thing?

Why is it that dietary commands just don't apply? (assuming you consider them not to)

I do not remember Jesus saying we are to reject the Law, or forget it... after all, on more than one occasion He told people to keep it ("show yourself to the priest", for example) but I'm just curious how you differentiate these.

If you go back and read post # 94, Shoshanah has explained the basics the same way as I believe.
There is also a thread that explains in more detail how I came to understand this whole big picture that I posted last year: The New Covenant Wine Is All of God’s Word
I am not an expert on dietary laws but I think they were given for the good health of man physically speaking and that there is probably a spiritual reason for each point also. Because I don't know all of the dietary laws, I strongly suspect that the Pharisees added a whole bunch of traditions to what God actually said, causing it to be very burdensome to keep them just like they did to other areas of the Torah instructions. Do I eat pork?...very rarely - I might have a BLT with one of the first tomatoes from the garden in the summer. I like ham and I like bacon but my not eating pork has a whole lot more to do with how hogs are fed, etc. before they end up on our plates. There is also the story of Peter seeing a vision of a sheet filled with clean and unclean animals which is teaching him to not call unclean what God has made clean, which I think applies to Peter associating with Gentiles (spiritually unclean), not just food.

By returning to the law I mean observing the law as we are supposed to now, which is spiritually. The physical laws of Torah were given so that we would be able to see how they apply to us as New Testament/Renewed Covenant believers. And you don't remember Jesus saying to reject the law because He didn't say that, ever.

 

[just-me]

Just-me

Yes, I too love the significance of the ritual as it pertains to the perfection of Christ. My point is not that we are to throw away everything except the NT. My Point is that we are to rightly divide it.

You would surly agree that none of the ritual you just expounded on is necessary knowledge for either salvation or a fulfilling Christian life. Interesting yes, just not completely necessary.

I think it is because God ordained it, but it is to be understood in the Spirit that it was originally given. Like the "feast of tabernacles" will also be observed during the millennial reign of Christ who has the "iron rod." (Zechariah 14:16-19)
Whether physically or only spiritually I do not know at this point.

I am not at all advocating ignorance, quite the opposite. Studying all the OT is fine but only if you completely understand the NT and new covenant, seeing that the NT is only a shadow and partial truth of the full measure revealed in the NT.

The only thing I ever have a problem with is the weight some give to the law. It seems that some wish to live by it using it as a means to either measure their righteousness or to attain righteousness. That my friend is grievous error. The law was only ever meant as a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.

It is edifying after being brought to Christ also. (Leviticus 26:10) I observe the law in the Spiritual aspects only at this point, and physically abide by the commandments that tell me how to conduct my life so I can properly represent Him. I cannot do it on my own.

Like the law of clean and unclean animals. The cud, split hoof, fins and scales of a fish all have spiritual meanings of profound importance to the New Covenant and how to walk, contend for the faith, and keep the armor on. It is important because it widens the panoramic view of God's greatness to us. God wants all of us to see Him in a greater aspect as we grow in His grace. His name is His word. His word describes to us His character. (Exodus 12:14) forever! (smile)

 

[just-me]

Paul instructed Timothy, and Paul made it clear how he worshiped God in Christ also. (Acts 24:14) So yes I'm sure Paul instructed Timothy to teach the law the right way and before teaching it, Timothy needed to study it. After all what we have as the New Testament writings wasn't available yet, but they did have what we know as the Old Testament writings.

So you honestly think that Paul instructed Timothy to teach the law, and not the new revelation that Jesus is the Christ? If Timothy was to know any law it was only to the extent that he could expound on the difference between the old and new covenant as Paul did in Hebrews.

Now I didn't say that. see this post

just-us-2 forgive me if I am being too bold.
If I may, Paul taught the right way to observe the law of God. Many abused it such as the self righteous Pharisees which Jesus confronted, but Jesus didn't tell them to neglect it. Just the opposite. (Matthew 23:23)

Paul instructed Timothy, and Paul made it clear how he worshiped God in Christ also. (Acts 24:14) So yes I'm sure Paul instructed Timothy to teach the law the right way, along with the risen Messiah, and the ushering/grafting in of the Gentiles to the kingdom of God according to the New covenant. But before teaching it, Timothy needed to study it. Timothy also needed to be coached on how to govern according to the position he was elected to fulfill.

After all this, what we have as the New Testament writings wasn't available yet, but they did have what we know as the Old Testament writings.

see this post also for the correct interpretation of Hebrews and the priesthood

 

[just-me]

Paul instructed Timothy, and Paul made it clear how he worshiped God in Christ also. (Acts 24:14) So yes I'm sure Paul instructed Timothy to teach the law the right way and before teaching it, Timothy needed to study it. After all what we have as the New Testament writings wasn't available yet, but they did have what we know as the Old Testament writings.

So you honestly think that Paul instructed Timothy to teach the law, and not the new revelation that Jesus is the Christ? If Timothy was to know any law it was only to the extent that he could expound on the difference between the old and new covenant as Paul did in Hebrews.

I do think I was editing while you were quoting me and you didn't get it all. I added this so you wouldn't get the idea that I wasn't including that and low and behold you didn't get it cause I wasn't done yet. But you were fast, and I was slow. LOL

this post only 5 minute apart from yours

 

[jamie26301]

And you don't remember Jesus saying to reject the law because He didn't say that, ever.

Yeah, I'm very familiar with the Gospels. I was just stating it that way in case I forgot something - very possible with being a human sinner with a faulty memory. I also try (sometimes fail) to word things such to reflect my willingness to learn new things, perhaps a point I hadn't heard before.

Thank you for you response. I look forward to the response from the person I actually addressed as well.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

both the old and new testaments are equally God's word...however it is very important to understand that we are not under two covenants...

 

[KennethC]

I knew this would turn into a thread about if the Mosaic written ordinance laws apply or don't apply in the new covenant.

The bible says;

Titus 3:9

But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

 

[atwhatcost]

The OT is not obsolete, just the Old Covenant of which the OT is the literature of.

Let me give you a list of words that all mean the same thing legally:
Covenant
Testament
Treaty
Contract
Will

The OT IS the OC. The Old Testament IS the Old Covenant. To say otherwise is like saying a car isn't an auto.