Grace

[Sipsey]

Can you just plainly state what you are trying to say, instead of moving the goal posts.

As we breathlessly await your response, here is some fodder for you to chew on:

The concept of ḥesed describes a human-human relationship, and the responsibilities incurred in such a relationship. When used to describe the divine-human relationship, ḥesed can appropriately be considered a word for grace, i.e., God’s free and uncoerced action for individuals or for the whole people, in a situation of grave need, when God is appealed to as the only source of assistance.

As a word describing God’s gracious activity toward and assistance for his people, ḥesed is part of the vocabulary of covenant in Israelite religious thought. In the Mosaic conditional covenant, which stresses human obedience as the basis for a continuing relationship with the deity, God’s ḥesed, involving deliverance and forgiveness for the undeserving, operates even in the context of a broken relationship. Where human sin and rebellion have ended Israel’s relationship to God, all that the people can expect is destruction, annihilation; when Israel experiences not divine wrath but God’s surprising and unexpected deliverance and preservation of the community, and divine forgiveness, Israel experiences the ḥesed of God. While human ḥesed depends upon an unbroken relationship in good repair between the superior and inferior parties, divine ḥesed is God’s gracious and unexpected decision to restore and repair the broken relationship.

In the other covenant form operative in God’s unconditional commitment to Israel’s patriarchs and kings, God’s relationship with the human covenant partner is based on the divine promise alone, and thus is not subject to negation because of human failure. Thus ḥesed includes both undeserved deliverance (in the context of the Sinai covenant) and promised divine fidelity (in the context of the royal covenant).

 

[Peterlag]

LOL


How many guesses are we to take before you show us the magical hidden understanding ?

How about the whole ceremonial law? The Mosaic Law? It used in ceremonies as parable to hide the unseen things of God. .

It's taking me a long time to understand how this site works. I post something concerning the new testament and someone responds with an old testament verse. To keep on my topic is why I ask that one person for a verse on the subject. Then 15 guys reply who never posted an old testament reply and ask me why I'm asking such questions.

 

[Peterlag]

Can you just plainly state what you are trying to say, instead of moving the goal posts.

It's taking me a long time to understand how this site works. I post something concerning the new testament and someone responds with an old testament verse. To keep on my topic is why I ask that one person for a verse on the subject. Then 15 guys reply who never posted an old testament reply and ask me why I'm asking such questions.

 

[garee]

It's taking me a long time to understand how this site works. I post something concerning the new testament and someone responds with an old testament verse. To keep on my topic is why I ask that one person for a verse on the subject. Then 15 guys reply who never posted an old testament reply and ask me why I'm asking such questions.

It would seem in opening you 200 page offering. You give the idea a wonder to seek In regard to Stephen . The grace of God is shown doing its work of Abel the apostle prophet who is used to represent the first born of God . ( a type of the Son of man,.) In Adam (Cain) all die. Abel is the first prophet sent with the gospel, first martyr also Grace (the fullness for every one) is not limited to time periods . Grace reveals the mysteries it does not hide them in the old testament Mosaic laws

Why are you asking such questions? it got be wondering .How long before you reveal the answer? Waiting to long is not kind? It could turn into rude. Abel full of the same Grace saw the same glory as Stephen.


Acts 7:55 But Stephen was full of the Holy Spirit. He looked up into heaven and saw the glory of God. And he saw Jesus standing at God’s right side.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Okay so you don't have a verse concerning the old covenant.

Here is a quote from your OP:

"The works of the flesh, the works of the Old Testament Law, and good behavior does not make us acceptable with God."​

The “works of the flesh, the works of the Old Testament Law, and good behavior” never made anyone acceptable with God. That was never the intent of the Old Testament Law.

I, and others, have shown that God’s grace permeates the whole of Scripture.


Hebrews 10:1 tells us For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

The law was a shadow of good things to come and Hebrews 10:1 again reiterates that the law could never make anyone perfect … because that was not the purpose of the law.

I would also add that the word "perfect" in Heb 10:1 does not mean sinless. The word perfect means 'complete, to reach the final stage'.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Your Love for the Lord shines out of you!x

Thank you for your kind words.

God bless your heart.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Hope that helps a bit.

~Deut

Yes it does … very much so. Thanks for clarifying.

Hello again @reneweddaybyday, perhaps I should mention that I know little to nothing about Bono. By the time U2 came onto the scene in 1976 I was in music school and listening to orchestral and jazz music exclusively (and then Christian music from Nov 2nd, 1986 onward ).



I heard him give a very moving speech about America once, and then I saw the quote of his above more recently. I've listened to a couple of his songs now, and I know he's a real famous guy, but that's about it.



I guess what I'm saying is that you may know a lot more about him than I do, so perhaps I am missing something of the big picture concerning him



~Deut

p.s. - Oh, and Happy Independence Day

I do not know much about Bono either. I believe he and others of his bandmates are born again. I used to listen to U2 cassettes in my car. Then I bought the Bible on cassette (and later CD). I worked about 30 minutes from home and it was great to listen to Bible during my commute.

And I do believe Bono at one time expressed his love for America … not sure if he still feels the same way in today’s political climate.

Thanks for the Happy Independence Day and the same to you and yours. Hope/pray all is well in your household.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

It's taking me a long time to understand how this site works.

Don’t worry about it … you’ll catch on soon enough.

I post something concerning the new testament and someone responds with an old testament verse. To keep on my topic is why I ask that one person for a verse on the subject.

Excuse me??? your OP mentions “Law given by Moses” ... the “works of the Old Testament Law” ...

and then you complain when OT verses responding to OP are provided to you?

What I (and others) have been pointing out to you is that God’s grace permeates all of time and history.

God's grace is God's grace and God does not/has not changed. The same grace afforded to Adam when he sinned is the same grace afforded to Moses and the children of Israel in the giving of the law in which the stated intent was to bring God’s people to Messiah through faith.

Believers under OC were brought to faith in Messiah … believers under NC are brought to the same faith as believers under OC. There is only one faith (Eph 4:5) and that one faith covers the span of human existence.

Then 15 guys reply who never posted an old testament reply and ask me why I'm asking such questions.

hahahahaha … welcome to BDF (bible discussion forum).

 

[Blik]

It's taking me a long time to understand how this site works. I post something concerning the new testament and someone responds with an old testament verse. To keep on my topic is why I ask that one person for a verse on the subject. Then 15 guys reply who never posted an old testament reply and ask me why I'm asking such questions.

There are 7,967 verses in the NT, 2,606 of them are quotes of the OT. The OT explains the NT, and the NT is a fulfillment of the OT. If you don't understand the OT you are limiting your understanding of the NT.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

There are 7,967 verses in the NT, 2,606 of them are quotes of the OT. The OT explains the NT, and the NT is a fulfillment of the OT. If you don't understand the OT you are limiting your understanding of the NT.

My husband and I did a study of the NT and any time an OT section was referenced, we went back and studied that section. That study, to us, was very interesting and enlightening. We enjoyed it very much.

 

[Blik]

My husband and I did a study of the NT and any time an OT section was referenced, we went back and studied that section. That study, to us, was very interesting and enlightening. We enjoyed it very much.

I have studied the Torah using the commentary by a man who often shows how the NT relates to a passage. Now that man has done a Matthews study that includes the OT passages Matthew referred to. It really does seem to round out and deepen scripture.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

I have studied the Torah using the commentary by a man who often shows how the NT relates to a passage. Now that man has done a Matthews study that includes the OT passages Matthew referred to. It really does seem to round out and deepen scripture.

One of the reasons my husband and I studied NT in that manner was because, since all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, those OT references were placed where God wanted to draw the attention of the reader in order to glean additional insight into both OT and NT.

It was my husband's idea to do the study in that way ... and we very much enjoyed the study.

 

[Peterlag]

There are 7,967 verses in the NT, 2,606 of them are quotes of the OT. The OT explains the NT, and the NT is a fulfillment of the OT. If you don't understand the OT you are limiting your understanding of the NT.

The problem I have with most if not all is that they don't understand the new because they continue to live in the old. Paul had the same problen with circumcision as I do with water baptism.

 

[Deuteronomy]

Hello @Peterlag, where does the OT refer to the practice of water baptism

Thanks

~Deut
p.s. -the idea of the NT ordinance is foreshadowed in the OT, of course (it's mentioned as such in the NT a few times .. e.g. 1 Corinthians 10:1-2), but I don't believe that it was ever practiced in OT times, was it (the many ceremonial washings in ancient Israel were hardly akin to NT baptism). Perhaps the OT mentions something like baptism for the remission of sins, à la John the Baptist?
.

 

[Blik]

The problem I have with most if not all is that they don't understand the new because they continue to live in the old. Paul had the same problen with circumcision as I do with water baptism.

The problems I see is sort of opposite to what you see. People do not see it is the same God giving the same instructions as God uses water, the only difference is in the Holy Spirit. Circumcision in God's eyes never was limited to the cutting of foreskin and I see problems with people understanding this.

 

[Peterlag]

Hello @Peterlag, where does the OT refer to the practice of water baptism

Thanks

~Deut
p.s. -the idea of the NT ordinance is foreshadowed in the OT, of course (it's mentioned as such in the NT a few times .. e.g. 1 Corinthians 10:1-2), but I don't believe that it was ever practiced in OT times, was it (the many ceremonial washings in ancient Israel were hardly akin to NT baptism). Perhaps the OT mentions something like baptism for the remission of sins, à la John the Baptist?
.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John could be a nice place to start in answering your question. Since those books do not deal with the new covenant because the Christ had not yet been resurrected. And God did not put that blank paper in front of the book of Matthew that says New Testament. Men did that.

 

[Blik]

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John could be a nice place to start in answering your question. Since those books do not deal with the new covenant because the Christ had not yet been resurrected. And God did not put that blank paper in front of the book of Matthew that says New Testament. Men did that.

If the only salvation or the Holy Spirit (new covenant) only started after God had created the earth for 4,000 years, in your mind, if everything in the world was "not yet" as you say, how can you worship or believe in Christ who is God? It would mean even Moses was to die from his sin. Jesus, we are told was there at the beginning, do you think Jesus turned a blind eye on every human until he lived as a man?

God used water over and over in the OT, did it only clean the surface dirt from skin? Oh My!!!!

 

[Peterlag]

If the only salvation or the Holy Spirit (new covenant) only started after God had created the earth for 4,000 years, in your mind, if everything in the world was "not yet" as you say, how can you worship or believe in Christ who is God? It would mean even Moses was to die from his sin. Jesus, we are told was there at the beginning, do you think Jesus turned a blind eye on every human until he lived as a man?

God used water over and over in the OT, did it only clean the surface dirt from skin? Oh My!!!!

Galatians 5:1-4
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

We will fall from the understanding of the grace that is in Christ, and succumb to the doctrines and theories that are dictated by human conception if we seek justification by our own works. The concision was from those who taught circumcision was necessary for salvation. Circumcision is a work of the flesh required by the Old Testament Law, and by the way so is water baptism, which is a carryover from part of the Levitical Law.

There are many examples of people in the Old Testament who would wash themselves with water as a final step to being clean. Water baptism was an outward sign of washing, and then you would be clean to God. Baptism in water, and the need to be circumcised passed away with the coming of Pentecost, as did the other Levitical Laws. To be led by the spirit is to not be under the yoke of bondage with the extreme of legalism, seeking the works of the flesh from the old covenant concerning the past Law administration that was written to Israel.

It's clear from the gospels that water baptism had to do with the kingdom, which was ministered by John who was known as the Baptizer, and not a minister for the Church of God. John who was a prophet functioning under the old covenant was appointed by God to prepare and confirm the promises made to Israel. His message was to tell those who lived under the old covenant that the king had come and “the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

He used water as a sign to baptize those who believed the promised Messiah would be coming in just a matter of months and to illustrate that he would be the Christ, who would baptize them not with material water, but with holy spirit, which is “power from on high.” From the habit of tradition, and only for a short period of time, a small handful of people were baptized with water into the New Testament, but never again afterwards.

In the epistles written just a little bit past the beginning of the New Testament is where we read the only time water baptism is mentioned is to note there is no more need for it, and that we are now to be baptized with holy spirit. And this is why in Acts 2:38, Peter commands “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ.” In Acts 8:16, Peter and John “baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” In Acts 10:48, Peter “commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” In Romans 6:3, it declares “that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ.”

There is not one exception to this practice where we see water baptism, which belonged to the time period when Christ walked the earth, being used once the Church of God had become established. To suggest water baptism has anything to do with the only begotten resurrected Son of God, who is functioning within the New Testament as the head of the body of Christ, has led to nothing but confusion and has provided a bomb that has blown the local churches into pieces.

 

[Deuteronomy]

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John could be a nice place to start in answering your question. Since those books do not deal with the new covenant because the Christ had not yet been resurrected. And God did not put that blank paper in front of the book of Matthew that says New Testament. Men did that.

Hello again @Peterlag, you mentioned that water baptism is something that was part of the OT (in post #53 above), but I'm confused, because you've pointed me to the Gospels instead (which are part of the NT, not the Old).

Is there anywhere in the OT (or perhaps even Jewish "Tradition" from OT times) that mentions water baptism? If there is, it has definitely slipped my mind (which is, of course, why I am asking, and because I am interested, particularly in the origins of John's baptism).

Thanks again

~Deut
p.s. - the Gospels do seem to me a bridge of sorts between the OT and the New, the old covenant and the new. Principally, they tell us about Lord Jesus, but they also tell us the Good News, yes? For instance:

John 5​

24 "He who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life."​

​

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Galatians 5:1-4
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

I do not believe these verses indicate that male believers who are circumcised do not profit from Christ ... or that they are debtors to the law ... or that Christ has no effect on them.

I believe what these verses are saying is that if those who are circumcised believe circumcision = salvation ... then Christ profits nothing ... they become debtors to the whole law ... Christ becomes of no effect.

I believe it is okay for males to be circumcised so long as they understand that salvation is the gift of God.


and for the record ... I believe you understand this. I just wanted to clarify.