The Dangers of the Hebrew Roots Messianic Movement

[Yahshua]

But the elders who went up with Moses did not die in order to get closer to God.

Not only that, they did not die even when they saw God.


But there was no death of them involved to get closer to God.


The are closer to God by his sovereign choice, not by earning it with death (to self).


The NT does not present God as having two peoples, one faithful, and one not.

The NT presents true faith which saves, and counterfeit faith which does not save (Mt 7:21-23),
but both groups profess faith, while one group does not really have it, and are not the redeemed of God.

God chose the nation Israel, but not all for salvation, only all for his purpose (Ro 9:11).
All may have professed faith in God, but all did not possess true (obedient) faith in God,
and were not the redeemed.


Servants are not sons.
Those who were not ready had the door shut on them and entrance to the kingdom denied to them.
Those who fall away were never, and are not, the redeemed, which is proven by their falling away
(1Jn 2:19).

I apologize. This is the weakness of summaries (I run into this problem all of the time when writing for others. To go through the proof text of each point is often times necessary but can take as long of a time as the summary.

---

We all believe that God doesn't change as his word says. So you should see the parallels in everything he does, for instance: The following is the structure of God’s temple...

Holiest Place || Holy Place | Court Yard | (gateway/altar)| <outside the temple>
​

If we consider that the Temple of God is a model of his kingdom/government, notice that in order to enter into the temple a sacrifice (death) was required.

Holiest Place || Holy Place | Court Yard |(death)| <outside the temple>​

Now notice the same imagery for the mountain of God...

Highest up the Mt || Higher up the Mt. | Base of the Mt. |(death)| <off the mountain>​

There is no possible way for any person to enter into the presence of God without a death because no one is worthy to enter into God’s presence. However, what’s impossible for man is possible for God. *By the blood*, one’s able to satisfy the required death without dying.

• For the temple, a lamb was [1] sacrificed (actual death) to cover sin and [2] one was baptized (death to self/old man; their act of faith) before [3] one could enter in.

• For the mountain, Moses [1] killed oxen (actual death) & sprinkled blood on the people (SEE Exodus 24:8), and [2] because they were baptized in the Reed Sea (death to old man/Egypt; their walk of faith), they were [3] now allowed to touch the mountain. But until Moses covered them by the blood, no one could approach/touch the Mt. Sinai.

• For the kingdom, Christ [1] sacrificed himself (actual death) & covers us with his blood...but to [3] enter in we’re also required to [2] “die to self”, our *act/walk* of faith.

Mark 8:34-35

Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it."

Luke 9:23-24

Then he said to them all: "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will save it."

Galatians 5:24

24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

Colossians 3:3-7

3 For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.

John 12:24-25

Most assuredly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces much grain. 25 He who loves his life will lose it, and he who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.

Colossians 2:12

having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

Indeed there was death for the elders of Israel to get closer to God. The *ability* to satisfy their required death was an *act of God*, but the elders had to have enough faith to walk.

That is the gospel call, which separates the elect from the non-elect,
not the devout from the worldly among the redeemed.

Please don’t misunderstand me. No, I’m not saying there are two different peoples...but a hierarchy; a government being formed. Christ noted that there is a “least” in the kingdom of God as well as a “greater” in the kingdom of God (Matthew 5:19; 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44)...and it’s based on what one does in this life.

Holiest Place || Holy Place | Court Yard |(death)| <outside of God’s temple>

Closest to God || Closer to God | In God’s presence |(death)| <not in God’s presence>

Christ || The “first fruits” | The Great Multitude |(death)| <The unrepentant world>​

This isn't a salvation issue but a “reward” issue, where one's placed in the Kingdom/Government; and what responsibilities one's given in reward for obedience.

Your analogy is really beginning to deviate from the NT word of God.

Moses was not, and never was, their savior, he was the mediator between them and God,
who interceded for them.
Only God in Christ Jesus is their Savior.

This is why distinctions between such things as savior, mediator and administrator are so important.
These titles have offices and functions.
To incorrectly use these titles is to incorrectly assign functions, as in making Moses their Savior.


I'm having problems making your picture fit into the NT word of God written.

Remember it’s all a prophetic picture; a parable of the truth fulfilled in Christ.

Exodus 7:1

And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

Holiest Place || Holy Place | Court Yard |(death)| <outside of God’s temple>

Christ || The “first fruits” | The Great Multitude |(death)| <The unrepentant world>

Moses || The Elders | The Children of Israel |(death)| <The Pagan nations>​

Moses prefigured Christ to the Children of Israel (and Aaron was his prophet), like Christ is Messiah to God’s people (and John the Baptist his prophet). The picture had to be perfect because Christ had to fulfill it, and so that we would have our parallel example to know what happens...because not one stroke of the pen is removed from the Torah until ALL is fulfilled. Until all is finished, all of it still applies. God isn’t linear like we are, because God is “he who was, is, and is to come” all at once.

This is why I can say Moses was their “savior” and “mediator”, because he had to perfectly prefigure Christ. The same way we say Christ is “savior” of the world (the fulfillment of that scripture)...and ultimately God is the one who saves in both counts. Again, everything that happened to Israel is a living parable; a prophecy so it *had to be perfect in imagery*. It is only in this perfect imagery that Christ could fulfill being the prophesied messenger “like unto Moses”.

Moses glowed as the result of being with God.
Peter, James and John did not glow.

You're right they didn't glow but Moses was glowing when he descended off of the Mt. like when Peter James and John saw Christ and Moses (and Elijah) glowing when Christ came into his kingdom (at the transfiguration). I wasn't associating the apostle to Moses but to what they saw.

Okay, any interpretation of unfulfilled symbolic prophetic riddles is necessarily uncertain.
Only interpretation of fulfilled symbolic prophetic riddles is certain, as in Dan.

But one thing we can know about the meaning of any unfulfilled symbolic prophetic riddle.
It will always agree with the NT word of God written.

Now having stated the Biblical principle, do you mean Rev 14?
I find no indication there that only a few covered by the blood follow the Lamb where he goes.

Revelation is highly symbolic (e.g., chps 12, 13, 17), and I find the numbers therein to be likewise.
The number of completion (12, X 12,000) is symbolically assigned to those redeemed (Rev 14:13) in
the blood of the Lamb, while the others (Rev 14:14-20) are the unredeemed.
The redeemed follow the Lamb, the unredeemed do not.


That is just not stacking up with the NT word of God for me.

I find nothing in the NT that warrants two different peoples of God, the elite and the common.
The NT everywhere states that only the faithful have true saving faith and are redeemed,
while the unfaithful were never redeemed (e.g., Mt 7:21-23).

We’re looking back to understand what we now have in Christ, and to forward to what must happen next. We’re not diminishing fulfillment in Christ, as he’s the only one at the right hand of the Father. But by not understanding the “government” of God exemplified over and over and over in scripture one’s prone to think that there’s nothing for us to do; that everyone’s going to be on the same level, with harps and such (the harps bit is a joke). God is building his building, and the measuring rod must be laid so that every living stone is in its proper place.

Mark 4:20

Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop--some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown."

Christ || The “first fruits” | The Great Multitude |(death)| <The unrepentant world>

100% || 60% | 30% |(seed sown/Christ's death/the gateway)| <Dry ground>​

See the structure of God’s kingdom in the parable? Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-30) gives roughly the same structure...

Christ || The “first fruits” | The Great Multitude |(death)| <The unrepentant world>

The Rewarder || 5 Talents (went to 11) | 2 Talents (went to 4) |(obedience)| <1 Talent (taken away)>​

1 Corinthians 3:11-13

11 For no man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

12 Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work

 

[Yahshua]

1 Corinthians 15:35 - The Resurrection Body

35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” 36 How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies.

37 When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38 But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body.

39 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another.

40 There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another.

41 The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

<Temple of God>
Holiest Place || Holy Place | Court Yard | (gateway/Christ)| <outside the temple>

<Heavenly Bodies>
Sun Glory || Moon Glory | Star Glory |(death)| <Earthly Bodies>


​

Revelation 21:22-24

22 I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple [i.e. the body of Christ].

23 The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp.

24 The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25 On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there.

26 The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it.

27 Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.

<The People of God>
Sun Splendor|| Moon Splendor | Star splendor |(death)| <Natural Bodies>

​

Matthew 13:43

Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Daniel 12:3

And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

 

[Elin]

I apologize. This is the weakness of summaries (I run into this problem all of the time when writing for others. To go through the proof text of each point is often times necessary but can take as long of a time as the summary.

We all believe that God doesn't change as his word says. So you should see the parallels in everything he does,

Thank you for all your trouble here.

However, this principle is nowhere presented in Scripture.
Indeed, there are numerous parallels in what God does,
but we have no Biblical warrant for positing "parallels in everything he does."

Assumptive principles necessarily lead to assumptive conclusions having no Biblical warrant.

And I find many assumptive principles in your presentation of Scripture.

for instance: The following is the structure of God’s temple...

Holiest Place || Holy Place | Court Yard | (gateway/altar)| <outside the temple>

Holiest Place || Holy Place | Court Yard |(death)| <outside the Temple>

If we consider that the Temple of God is a model of his kingdom/government, notice that
in order to enter into the temple a sacrifice (death) was required.

Actually, your order is wrong, your subject (entrance) and object (sacrifice) are reversed.
Entrance didn't require sacrifice, rather sacrifice required entrance.

Firstly, the High Priest regularly entered the Temple without sacrifice to tend the lamps (Lev 24:3-4),
and weekly without sacrifice to change the bread of the Presence (Lev 24:8).

Your analogy is incorrect and, therefore, your application of your incorrect analogy in the rest of the post is incorrect, since it is based on entrance requiring sacrifice.

Secondly, entrance into the Holy of Holies was required once a year for the purpose of cleansing it from its defilement, caused by being in the midst of an unclean people (Lev 16:16; 15:31; cf Nu 19:20).
Its cleansing was always by the blood of sacrifice.

So the blood (sacrifice) taken into the Temple was not about a requirement for entering the Temple,
it was about the requirement for cleansing the Temple.

Please don’t misunderstand me. No, I’m not saying there are two different peoples...but a hierarchy; a government being formed. Christ noted that there is a “least” in the kingdom of God as well as a “greater” in the kingdom of God (Matthew 5:19; 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:44)...and it’s based on what one does in this life.

In Mt 5:19, it is not what it appears to be.
For the ones who are the "least" in the kingdom of heaven; i.e., Pharisees who teach and practice contrary to the word of God (v.19), also do not enter the kingdom of heaven (v.20).

"For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Mt 5:19-20 is about counterfeit faith v. true faith.
It's about being in the kingdom, but not of the kingdom,
which we find throughout the NT; e.g., Mt 7:21-23.

In Mt 23:11, the man without wedding clothes was unredeemed, possessed counterfeit faith
(Mt 7:21-23) and was cast into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (hell).
He was not even in the kingdom, not because of his life, but because of his counterfeit faith, no true faith.

In Mk 9:35, 10:44, the last (servant, slave to all) shall be first, and the first shall be last (Mt 20:16).
There is no preferment in the kingdom, there is only service in the kingdom in accordance with the grace God has given.

Moses prefigured Christ to the Children of Israel (and Aaron was his prophet), like Christ is Messiah to God’s people (and John the Baptist his prophet).

Scripture does not agree with you.

Moses was the Lawgiver, Prophet (Dt 19:17) and Mediator between God and the people (Ex 19:7-8, 20:19; Gal 3:19-20), like Christ.
But Aaron was High Priest, not prophet.

This is why I can say Moses was their “savior”

But Scrpture doesn't say that, and so you also can't say that.
Scriptures states that only God in Christ Jesus is Savior.

and “mediator”, because he had to perfectly prefigure Christ.

That is another assumptive principle, not a Biblical principle.

Moses was not King, nor High Priest, nor sacrifice, nor scape goat, nor. . .
so he could not perfectly prefigure Christ.
Christ was not perfectly prefigured in any one person or thing.

Prefigures of Christ included:
sacrifices
blood of cleansing
water of cleansing
scape goat
prophet
lawgiver
High Priest
mediator
king

No one person or thing was all of these.

See the structure of God’s kingdom in the parable? Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-30) gives roughly the same structure...

This isn't a salvation issue but a “reward” issue, where one's placed in the Kingdom/Government; and what responsibilities one's given in reward for obedience.

The parable of the talents is the third of three parables on genuine and counterfeit faith,
not on rewards of the redeemed.

1) Mt 24:45-51 - faithful and wise servant vs. no faithfulness (belief) and watchfulness - hypocrite
2) Mt 25:1-13 - no Holy Spirit, spiritual life - counterfeit faith - door is shut, entrance to kingdom denied
3) Mt 25:14-30 - no fruit, unbelief, hard thoughts of God resulting in slavish fear (vv. 24-25), laziness revealed in false excuse (vv.26-27) - counterfeit faith

The parable of the talents is about appearing before the Lord empty-handed (Dt 16:16-17),
not about hierarchy in the kingdom.

Your analogies are not stacking up with the word of God for me.

 

[Yahshua]

We all believe that God doesn't change as his word says. So you should see the parallels in everything he does,

Thank you for all your trouble here.

However, this principle is nowhere presented in Scripture.
Indeed, there are numerous parallels in what God does,
but we have no Biblical warrant for positing "parallels in everything he does."

Assumptive principles necessarily lead to assumptive conclusions having no Biblical warrant.

And I find many assumptive principles in your presentation of Scripture.

Malachi 3:6

For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Isaiah 46:10

Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

Ecclesiastes 1:9

What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

God doesn't change. He has shared all the things he will do from ancient times (because no one can stop him)...and as Solomon prophesied, everything repeats; there’s nothing new. These three passages form the principle all I've written stands on. It may be hard to accept that God doesn't change because we constantly must (as situations develop and change) but truly, as I'm sure you know, God knows ALL things from the beginning so he doesn't need to change or do anything new - ever - because we people and fallen angels are not that smart to foil his plans lol.

]
Actually, your order is wrong, your subject (entrance) and object (sacrifice) are reversed.
Entrance didn't require sacrifice, rather sacrifice required entrance.

Firstly, the High Priest regularly entered the Temple without sacrifice to tend the lamps (Lev 24:3-4),
and weekly without sacrifice to change the bread of the Presence (Lev 24:8).

Your analogy is incorrect and, therefore, your application of your incorrect analogy in the rest of the post is incorrect, since it is based on entrance requiring sacrifice.

Secondly, entrance into the Holy of Holies was required once a year for the purpose of cleansing it from its defilement, caused by being in the midst of an unclean people (Lev 16:16; 15:31; cf Nu 19:20).
Its cleansing was always by the blood of sacrifice.

So the blood (sacrifice) taken into the Temple was not about a requirement for entering the Temple,
it was about the requirement for cleansing the Temple.

Holiest Place || Holy Place | Court Yard | (gateway/altar)| <outside the temple>
<-----------------------------Pathway to God---------------------------

​

Notice that for anyone to enter into the temple (and we're not talking about the "High Priest" because that role prefigures Christ who needs no one's blood to enter into God's presence), a sacrifice was first required (altar) and next baptism (molten sea)...as one can not enter into the presence of God presumptuously. This is why the temple was structured this precise way; from east to west with the Altar as the first object one approaches. One must first be cleansed to enter into God's presence because he is Holy. One had to approach the alter FIRST before dwelling in the courtyard.

In Mt 5:19, it is not what it appears to be.
For the ones who are the "least" in the kingdom of heaven; i.e., Pharisees who teach and practice contrary to the word of God (v.19), also do not enter the kingdom of heaven (v.20).

"For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Mt 5:19-20 is about counterfeit faith v. true faith.
It's about being in the kingdom, but not of the kingdom,
which we find throughout the NT; e.g., Mt 7:21-23.

In Mt 23:11, the man without wedding clothes was unredeemed, possessed counterfeit faith
(Mt 7:21-23) and was cast into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (hell).
He was not even in the kingdom, not because of his life, but because of his counterfeit faith, no true faith.

In Mk 9:35, 10:44, the last (servant, slave to all) shall be first, and the first shall be last (Mt 20:16).
There is no preferment in the kingdom, there is only service in the kingdom in accordance with the grace God has given.

I don't understand. The passages you're quoting aren't the passages I referenced. My Matthew 23:11 isn't about the parable of the wedding banquet, but says

The greatest among you will be your servant.

...even still, my point was to show there's a hierarchy in the kingdom. Yet, what they were about still doesn't detract or disprove my point that there's a hierarchy in Christ's kingdom...the hierarchy is just not reckoned the way man established hierarchy.

Scripture does not agree with you.

Moses was the Lawgiver, Prophet (Dt 19:17) and Mediator between God and the people (Ex 19:7-8, 20:19; Gal 3:19-20), like Christ.
But Aaron was High Priest, not prophet.

But I gave scripture where God *himself* says this but you tell me scripture does not agree with me. I don't understand. Exodus 7:1...

And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

Yet you say scripture doesn't say this? You say Aaron was not Moses's prophet, and Moses was not God to Pharaoh who saved his people? Was God wrong? Did he misspeak in this portion of scripture?

But Scripture doesn't say that, and so you also can't say that.
Scriptures states that only God in Christ Jesus is Savior.

That is another assumptive principle, not a Biblical principle.

Moses was not King, nor High Priest, nor sacrifice, nor scape goat, nor. . .
so he could not perfectly prefigure Christ.
Christ was not perfectly prefigured in any one person or thing.

Prefigures of Christ included:
sacrifices
blood of cleansing
water of cleansing
scape goat
prophet
lawgiver
High Priest
mediator
king

No one person or thing was all of these.

I'm at a loss, Elin...you deny what WAS written and yet reject what is clearly implied in context, so it seems it doesn't matter what I point out because you simply don't accept it :/ ...and I guess that's the way it'll be for now.

The ram caught in the thicket perfectly prefigures Christ in its role as substitution, but you would say "no it doesn't because the ram isn't a man". Joseph being sold by his brothers perfectly prefigures Christ in his role as savior (because without Joseph Israel would've died), but you would say "no because he wasn't a high priest". David being a man after God's own heart perfectly prefigures Christ in his role as king, yet you would say "no because he had children". No one is say one person was all of what Christ is. Who can be ALL of what Christ is?? Moses has a couple of chapters involving him, whereas Christ has THE ENTIRE COLLECTION OF SCRIPTURE talking about him. But just like these other men in biblical history perfectly prefigured Christ **in their role**, in Moses's role he was INDEED "savior" of ancient Israel (with God being the *source* of that salvation as prime mover) because without Moses Israel would've died. It seems that if I also said Pharaoh of Egypt and Haman of the book of Ester prefigure satan, you would deny those too; but I can't understand why.

The parable of the talents is the third of three parables on genuine and counterfeit faith,
not on rewards of the redeemed.

1) Mt 24:45-51 - faithful and wise servant vs. no faithfulness (belief) and watchfulness - hypocrite
2) Mt 25:1-13 - no Holy Spirit, spiritual life - counterfeit faith - door is shut, entrance to kingdom denied
3) Mt 25:14-30 - no fruit, unbelief, hard thoughts of God resulting in slavish fear (vv. 24-25), laziness revealed in false excuse (vv.26-27) - counterfeit faith

The parable of the talents is about appearing before the Lord empty-handed (Dt 16:16-17),
not about hierarchy in the kingdom.

Your analogies are not stacking up with the word of God for me.

No the parable of the talents is not about appearing before the lord empty handed because the prefigured "lord" in the parable gave the talents *TO* the servants. So they weren't empty handed to begin with, not even the unfaithful servant was empty handed. It was about being faithful in WORKING, using what God gave you; not just sitting there thinking there nothing required for a servant to do. The operative phrases in the parable are:

-Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.

Contrasted with...

- "YOU WICKED, **LAZY** SERVANT"

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

God doesn't change. ...

What does this mean? I can show in scripture where GOD changed his mind. I can show in scripture where GOD said to not do something, and then blessed someone who did it. I can show in scripture where GOD said this will not happen, and then blessed someone through whom it did happen.

So what does it mean when a law-follower says that GOD does not change?

 

[Yahshua]

God doesn't change. ...

What does this mean? I can show in scripture where GOD changed his mind. I can show in scripture where GOD said to not do something, and then blessed someone who did it. I can show in scripture where GOD said this will not happen, and then blessed someone through whom it did happen.

So what does it mean when a law-follower says that GOD does not change?

That last question seems to be asked so derogatorily, Herose...or am I reading too much into it ? You're suggesting you can prove that "God is double minded", that "disobedience is blessed", that "God is not omniscient". Also you seem to want to make this into another legal battle...but I'm trying to keep my posts as close to the purpose of the thread as possible; showing that understanding Hebrew Roots further clarifies what we actually have and where we're going.

---

Now "God doesn't change" means exactly what scripture says. Malachi 3:6

For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed/destroyed.

God does not change. There's no need for him to adapt or adjust to a situation. All things that happen are according to his will. All things. If God is like us - changing as his mind as a situation necessitates - Israel, and we for that matter, would've been destroyed a long time ago. God will not go back on a word he gives. God is he who was, is, and will be all at once; at all points in time, at once. He knows all so there's nothing to adapt or adjust to. This also means everything he says at one point in time reverberates and applies across all points in time.

Numbers 23:19

God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should change his mind: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

Not even his son changes.

Hebrew 13:8

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

If God can change his mind then there's no hope for any of us, because that means on a whim the blood of Christ can no longer matter at some point. It also suggests his first choices weren't his best - that he makes mistakes - and so consequently he's not fit to make any choices. If God changes his mind scripture is broken.

Now, if you share scenes where God has changed his mind after scripture says he doesn't, I guarantee you that any instance you reference can be explained as being part of God's plan...otherwise, God's is a liar.

 

[zone]

If God can change his mind then there's no hope for any of us

Amos 7
2And it came about, when it had finished eating the vegetation of the land, that I said, "Lord GOD, please pardon! How can Jacob stand, For he is small?" 3 The LORD changed His mind about this. "It shall not be," said the LORD. 4 Thus the Lord GOD showed me, and behold, the Lord GOD was calling to contend with them by fire, and it consumed the great deep and began to consume the farm land

New International Version
So the LORD relented. "This will not happen," the LORD said.

New Living Translation
So the LORD relented from this plan. "I will not do it," he said.

English Standard Version
The LORD relented concerning this: “It shall not be,” said the LORD.

New American Standard Bible
The LORD changed His mind about this. "It shall not be," said the LORD.

King James Bible
The LORD repented for this: It shall not be, saith the LORD.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
The LORD relented concerning this. "It will not happen," He said.

International Standard Version
So the LORD relented from this. "This will not happen," said the LORD.

NET Bible
The LORD decided not to do this. "It will not happen," the LORD said.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

That last question seems to be asked so derogatorily, Herose...or am I reading too much into it ?

I didn't mean it in a bad way. Law followers say this all of the time, so I thought it was applicable.

Now, if you share scenes where God has changed his mind after scripture says he doesn't, I guarantee you that any instance you reference can be explained as being part of God's plan...otherwise, God's is a liar.

So now you admit that GOD can change as long as it's part of his plan. I agree. And that is exactly what happened with the law of Moses.

I can show in scripture where GOD changed his mind.

And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not. Jonah 3:10​

I can show in scripture where GOD said to not do something, and then blessed someone who did it.

But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests? Matthew 12:3-4​

I can show in scripture where GOD said this will not happen, and then blessed someone through whom it did happen.

Example 1

An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever: Deuteronomy 23:3

So Boaz took Ruth [the Moabitess], and she was his wife: and when he went in unto her, the LORD gave her conception, and she bare a son. Ruth 4:13

... and they called his name Obed: he is the father of Jesse, the father of David. Ruth 4:17
​

Example 2

He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD. Deuteronomy 23:1

For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant; Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off. Isaiah 56:4-5

And as they were traveling down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?” And he ordered the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water—Philip and the eunuch—and he baptized him. Acts 8:36-38​

 

[Yahshua]

Amos 7
2And it came about, when it had finished eating the vegetation of the land, that I said, "Lord GOD, please pardon! How can Jacob stand, For he is small?" 3 The LORD changed His mind about this. "It shall not be," said the LORD. 4 Thus the Lord GOD showed me, and behold, the Lord GOD was calling to contend with them by fire, and it consumed the great deep and began to consume the farm land

New International Version
So the LORD relented. "This will not happen," the LORD said.

New Living Translation
So the LORD relented from this plan. "I will not do it," he said.

English Standard Version
The LORD relented concerning this: “It shall not be,” said the LORD.

New American Standard Bible
The LORD changed His mind about this. "It shall not be," said the LORD.

King James Bible
The LORD repented for this: It shall not be, saith the LORD.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
The LORD relented concerning this. "It will not happen," He said.

International Standard Version
So the LORD relented from this. "This will not happen," said the LORD.

NET Bible
The LORD decided not to do this. "It will not happen," the LORD said.

Amos

The words of Amos, one of the shepherds of Tekoa—the vision he saw concerning Israel two years before the earthquake, when Uzziah was king of Judah and Jeroboam son of Jehoash[a] was king of Israel.
3 This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Damascus,
even for four, I will not relent...


6 This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Gaza,
even for four, I will not relent...


9 This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Tyre,
even for four, I will not relent...


11 This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Edom,
even for four, I will not relent...


13 This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Ammon,
even for four, I will not relent...


2 This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Moab,
even for four, I will not relent...

God explains the punishments he's executing for other nations.

4 This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Judah (his law giver),
even for four, I will not relent...

6 This is what the LORD says:
“For three sins of Israel (his fruitful bow),
even for four, I will not relent...


3 Hear this word, people of Israel, the word the LORD has spoken against you—against the whole family I brought up out of Egypt:
2 “You only have I chosen
of all the families of the earth;
therefore I will punish you
for all your sins.”


7 Surely the Sovereign LORD does nothing
without revealing his plan
to his servants the prophets.

God then goes to explain the punishments against Judah and Israel. Then in Chapter 4 God explains that Israel refused to return to him even though the punishments he sent to them...so his punishment increased in chapter 5. But he says if they repent he will stop.

14 Seek good, not evil,
that you may live.
Then the LORD God Almighty will be with you,
just as you say he is.
15 Hate evil, love good;
maintain justice in the courts.
Perhaps the LORD God Almighty will have mercy
on the remnant of Joseph.

Then God continues in chapter 6 explaining the pridefulness of his people, which he abhors...So he’s going to crush them as punishment.

Then by chapter 7 Amos gets a second vision.

7 This is what the Sovereign LORD showed me: He was preparing swarms of locusts after the king’s share had been harvested and just as the late crops were coming up. 2 When they had stripped the land clean, I cried out, “Sovereign LORD, forgive! How can Jacob survive? He is so small!”

3 So the LORD relented [Heb. “Nacham” = “Comforted”]. “This will not happen,” the LORD said.

4 This is what the Sovereign LORD showed me: The Sovereign LORD was calling for judgment by fire; it dried up the great deep and devoured the land. 5 Then I cried out, “Sovereign LORD, I beg you, stop! How can Jacob survive? He is so small!”

6 So the LORD relented [Heb. “Nacham” = “Comforted”]. “This will not happen either,” the Sovereign LORD said.

7 This is what he showed me: The Lord was standing by a wall that had been built true to plumb,[a]with a plumb line in his hand.

8 And the LORD asked me, “What do you see, Amos?” “A plumb line,” I replied. Then the Lord said, “Look, I am setting a plumb line among my people Israel; I will spare them no longer.

9 “The high places of Isaac will be destroyed
and the sanctuaries of Israel will be ruined;
with my sword I will rise against the house of Jeroboam.”

God did not change. In this second VISION to Amos, he showed (warning) grace, (warning) grace, and THEN when “the plumb line” was laid (always representing the measuring line; someone telling God's people their wrongfulness), THEN notice God gave judgment to Israel afterwards. So Amos warned Israel in the following verses. The previous chapter 6 showed God was of a singular mind when it came to their sin...but God is merciful giving warning after warning, then sends a prophet, then judgment.

 

[zone]

Amos


God explains the punishments he's executing for other nations.



God then goes to explain the punishments against Judah and Israel. Then in Chapter 4 God explains that Israel refused to return to him even though the punishments he sent to them...so his punishment increased in chapter 5. But he says if they repent he will stop.



Then God continues in chapter 6 explaining the pridefulness of his people, which he abhors...So he’s going to crush them as punishment.

Then by chapter 7 Amos gets a second vision.



God did not change. In this second VISION to Amos, he showed (warning) grace, (warning) grace, and THEN when “the plumb line” was laid (always representing the measuring line; someone telling God's people their wrongfulness), THEN notice God gave judgment to Israel afterwards. So Amos warned Israel in the following verses. The previous chapter 6 showed God was of a singular mind when it came to their sin...but God is merciful giving warning after warning, then sends a prophet, then judgment.

i've never said God changes in His Character or Who He is.

i posted this:

Amos 7
2And it came about, when it had finished eating the vegetation of the land, that I said, "Lord GOD, please pardon! How can Jacob stand, For he is small?" 3 The LORD changed His mind about this. "It shall not be," said the LORD. 4 Thus the Lord GOD showed me, and behold, the Lord GOD was calling to contend with them by fire, and it consumed the great deep and began to consume the farm land

it says what it says.

but i like your post

 

[Elin]

We all believe that God doesn't change as his word says. So you should see the parallels in everything he does,

Thank you for all your trouble here.

However, this principle is nowhere presented in Scripture.
Indeed, there are numerous parallels in what God does,
but we have no Biblical warrant for positing "parallels in everything he does."

Assumptive principles necessarily lead to assumptive conclusions having no Biblical warrant.

And I find many assumptive principles in your presentation of Scripture.

Malachi 3:6 - For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

I wasn't speaking of that principle, I was speaking of "you should see the parallels in everything he does."

The principle to which I was referring is seen in the statements immediately following reference to it.

Actually, your order is wrong, your subject (entrance) and object (sacrifice) are reversed.
Entrance didn't require sacrifice, rather sacrifice required entrance.

Firstly, the High Priest regularly entered the Temple without sacrifice to tend the lamps (Lev 24:3-4),
and weekly without sacrifice to change the bread of the Presence (Lev 24:8).

Your analogy is incorrect and, therefore, your application of your incorrect analogy in the rest of the post is incorrect, since it is based on entrance requiring sacrifice.

Secondly, entrance into the Holy of Holies was required once a year for the purpose of cleansing it from its defilement, caused by being in the midst of an unclean people (Lev 16:16; 15:31; cf Nu 19:20).
Its cleansing was always by the blood of sacrifice.

So the blood (sacrifice) taken into the Temple was not about a requirement for entering the Temple,
it was about the requirement for cleansing the Temple.

Holiest Place || Holy Place | Court Yard | (gateway/altar)| <outside the temple>
< -----------------------------Pathway to God---------------------------

Notice that for anyone to enter into the temple (and we're not talking about the "High Priest"

But in the OT, the High Priest was the only one allowed to enter into the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place.
So that is the only application that applies in your parallel.

In Mt 5:19, it is not what it appears to be.
For the ones who are the "least" in the kingdom of heaven; i.e., Pharisees who teach and practice contrary to the word of God (v.19), also do not enter the kingdom of heaven (v.20).

"For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Mt 5:19-20 is about counterfeit faith v. true faith.
It's about being in the kingdom, but not of the kingdom,
which we find throughout the NT; e.g., Mt 7:21-23.

In Mt 23:11, the man without wedding clothes was unredeemed, possessed counterfeit faith
(Mt 7:21-23) and was cast into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (hell).
He was not even in the kingdom, not because of his life, but because of his counterfeit faith, no true faith.

In Mk 9:35, 10:44, the last (servant, slave to all) shall be first, and the first shall be last (Mt 20:16).
There is no preferment in the kingdom, there is only service in the kingdom in accordance with the grace God has given.

I don't understand. The passages you're quoting aren't the passages I referenced.
My Matthew 23:11 isn't about the parable of the wedding banquet,

As a matter of fact, neither is mine. . .sorry about that.

So my response to Mt 23:11 is the same as my response to Mk 9:35, 10:44, above.

And none of them are about hierarchy in the kingdom.

what they were about still doesn't detract or disprove my point that there's a hierarchy in Christ's kingdom...the hierarchy is just not reckoned the way man established hierarchy.

But that is precisely what Jesus' phraseology means--
there is no difference between what men view as the least and the greatest in his kingdom.
They are equal: the least = the greatest, and the greatest = the least.

Scripture does not agree with you.

Moses was the Lawgiver, Prophet (Dt 19:17) and Mediator between God and the people (Ex 19:7-8, 20:19; Gal 3:19-20), like Christ.
But Aaron was High Priest, not prophet.

But I gave scripture where God *himself* says this but you tell me scripture does not agree with me. I don't understand. Exodus 7:1...

"I have made you like God to Pharoah, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet." (Ex 7:1)

Moses would be like God to Pharoah, in that he carried the word of God to Pharoah, and
Aaron would be like a prophet of Moses' to Pharoah, in that he would speak Moses' words of God to Pharoah.

It is an analogy.
The text is stating neither that Moses was God, nor that Aaron was a prophet of God.

that's why I can say Moses is a savior

But Scripture doesn't say that, and so you also can't say that.
Scriptures states that only God in Christ Jesus is Savior.

That is another assumptive principle, not a Biblical principle.

Moses was not King, nor High Priest, nor sacrifice, nor scape goat, nor. . .
so he could not perfectly prefigure Christ.
Christ was not perfectly prefigured in any one person or thing.

Prefigures of Christ included:
sacrifices
blood of cleansing
water of cleansing
scape goat
prophet
lawgiver
High Priest
mediator
king

No one person or thing was all of these.

I'm at a loss, Elin...you deny what WAS written and yet reject what is clearly implied in context, so it seems it doesn't matter what I point out because you simply don't accept it :/ ...and I guess that's the way it'll be for now.

Okay, time to back up and regroup.

First, it was not written that Aaron was a prophet of God, as is shown above.
You mistook an analogy for a declaration of reality.

Secondly, I do not understand to what are you referring which is clearly implied in the context and that I am rejecting.

men in biblical history perfectly prefigured Christ **in their role**, in Moses's role he was INDEED "savior" of ancient Israel (with God being the *source* of that salvation as prime mover) because without Moses Israel would've died. It seems that if I also said Pharaoh of Egypt and Haman of the book of Ester prefigure satan, you would deny those too; but I can't understand why.

Okay, so this must be to what you are referring that I am rejecting.

You are confusing pre-figure with its reality.

Yes, Moses could be called a pre-figure of Christ as Savior, but Moses cannot be called the Savior.
And even in his role as pre-figure, he was not the Savior, God was.

Just as, in their role as pre-figure, the sacrifices for sin could be called remission of sin.
But they did not remove (remit) sin (Heb 10:4), they only covered it (Ro 4:7), until the reality
of the pre-figures actually remitted it (Heb 9:15, 11:40; Ro 3:25),
as Moses did not actually save them, the reality in Christ saved them.

The parable of the talents is the third of three parables on genuine and counterfeit faith,
not on rewards of the redeemed.

1) Mt 24:45-51 - faithful and wise servant vs. no faithfulness (belief) and watchfulness - hypocrite
2) Mt 25:1-13 - no Holy Spirit, spiritual life - counterfeit faith - door is shut, entrance to kingdom denied
3) Mt 25:14-30 - no fruit, unbelief, hard thoughts of God resulting in slavish fear (vv. 24-25), laziness revealed in false excuse (vv.26-27) - counterfeit faith

The parable of the talents is about appearing before the Lord empty-handed (Dt 16:16-17),
not about hierarchy in the kingdom.

Your analogies are not stacking up with the word of God for me.

No the parable of the talents is not about appearing before the lord empty handed because the prefigured "lord" in the parable gave the talents *TO* the servants. So they weren't empty handed to begin with, not even the unfaithful servant was empty handed. It was about being faithful in WORKING, using what God gave you; not just sitting there thinking there nothing required for a servant to do.

The parable of the talents is about no fruit (Mt 25:14-30), just as
the unwatchful servant is about no faithfulness (Mt 24: 45-51), and
the five foolish virgins is about no Holy Spirit ( Mt 25:1-3),

all three of which are manifestations of no rebirth, no true faith, and no salvation.

The operative phrases in the parable are:

-Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things.

And also "Come, enter into the joy of the Lord." (v. 21)

Well, as everything else in the parables are analagous to the spiritual,
I see this as likewise analogous, first to the parable, where he was given many things
and, therefore, is put over many things,
and secondly, analagous to the spiritual, where our rewards will be a crown (2Tim 4:8),
a throne (Rev 3:21) and a kingdom (Mt 25:34), all emblems of reigning with Christ
in the heavenly realms now (Eph 2:6, 1:20).

Beyond that, I don't think I am willing to go, since it is all so analogous.

And problems still remain for me with your analogies not stacking to with the word of God.

 

[Yahshua]

I didn't mean it in a bad way. Law followers say this all of the time, so I thought it was applicable.

lol it's cool.

So now you admit that GOD can change as long as it's part of his plan. I agree. And that is exactly what happened with the law of Moses.

Oh no, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying what appears to look like a change in mind will be revealed as part of God's plan all along.

And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not. Jonah 3:10​

​

Jonah

1 The word of the LORD came to Jonah son of Amittai: 2 “Go to the great city of Nineveh and preach against it, because its wickedness has come up before me.”

Here’s another instance of God giving a warning to a people before a pending judgment. God didn't change his mind, but was of a singular mind to get the people to repent or he’d unleashes judgment.

3 Then the word of the LORD came to Jonah a second time: 2 “Go to the great city of Nineveh and proclaim to it the message I give you.”

4 Jonah began by going a day’s journey into the city, proclaiming, “Forty more days and Nineveh will be overthrown.”

God, through Jonah, warned Nineveh to repent or in 40 days judgment would fall; clock is ticking. Nineveh repented so God didn't judge them. God did not change. If God was of a singular mind to destroy the city he wouldn't have sent a prophet in the first place. God is warning them: heed Prophet or Judgment.

But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests? Matthew 12:3-4​

Ahh, but David was of the order of Melchizedek, an order legally established before the Levitical priesthood. David WAS a priest/king. Just like Solomon his son and just like Christ...all from Judah. Note, both David and Solomon **offered sacrifices** to God (a role only the "anointed high priest" does). David broke no law. That's what Christ was explaining to the Pharisees in a riddle. The bread David ate was only for priests to eat. Likewise the food Christ and the apostles were picking on the Sabbath was allowed because the 13 were ALSO priests (of the order of Melchizedek)...and priests are the only ones allowed to eat the consecrated food AND work on the Sabbath. The Pharisees wouldn't acknowledge his priesthood.

Example 1

An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever: Deuteronomy 23:3

So Boaz took Ruth [the Moabitess], and she was his wife: and when he went in unto her, the LORD gave her conception, and she bare a son. Ruth 4:13

... and they called his name Obed: he is the father of Jesse, the father of David. Ruth 4:17
​

Deuteronomy 23

23 He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

3 An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the Lord for ever:

4 Because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt; and because they hired against thee Balaam the son of Beor of Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse thee.

5 Nevertheless the Lord thy God would not hearken unto Balaam; but the Lord thy God turned the curse into a blessing unto thee, because the Lord thy God loved thee.

6 Thou shalt not seek their peace nor their prosperity all thy days for ever.

Note there's a time frame on the restriction of certain parties joining to Israel. Also note that I specifically bolded "all thy days" to show the difference between a temporary restriction (as in "to the tenth generation") and an everlasting one. God would've said "all thy days" if he also wanted Moab kept from Israel, like he told Israel to not help in their peace and prosperity "all thy days" (if I remember correctly, Moab was from Lot the nephew of Abraham...I gotta check this).

10 generations Moab was barred from the assembly of God because they didn't help when Israel as they passed through.

This was written in Deuteronomy so we're at least within the 40 years of wandering...Then we have the generations of Joshua & Judges, AND the time of the Kings, AND the time of the prophets, before Ruth. So it will have to be proven that Ruth was within the 10th generation to prove that God changed his mind on this decree, but I think 10 generations safely passed.

Exodus 34:7

maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation."

I merely show this verse to prove that God's punishments are temporary not permanent (with exception to blaspheming the Holy Spirit), because overall he's merciful.

Example 2

He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD. Deuteronomy 23:1

For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant; Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off. Isaiah 56:4-5

And as they were traveling down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?” And he ordered the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water—Philip and the eunuch—and he baptized him. Acts 8:36-38​

Isaiah 56:5

Even unto [eunuchs] will I give inside my house and within my walls a [Heb. Yad] and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off.

Yad is translated several ways in scripture but mostly translated as "hand" (859 times) and also means "memorial/monument". This doesn't say they will be joining to the people of Israel...and notice, the Eunich from Ethiopia didn't join to Israel but was baptized in the name of Christ, receiving that everlasting name. Now notice how God continues in Isaiah:

6 And foreigners who bind themselves to the Lord
to minister to him,
to love the name of the Lord,
and to be his servants,
all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it
and who hold fast to my covenant—
7 these I will bring to my holy mountain
and give them joy in my house of prayer.

Conparatively, foreigners are granted access to the actual house of prayer. The Eunichs are never told they'll be able to enter into the temple, but that they'd receive a memorial and name greater than "sons and daughters".

God does not change. God can't go back on his word.

 

[Yahshua]

I wasn't speaking of that principle, I was speaking of "you should see the parallels in everything he does."

The principle to which I was referring is seen in the statements immediately following reference to it.

Oh ok...But if God doesn't change, shouldn't one see God repeating himself in scripture; his actions paralleling former actions? You don't believe this is the case?

But in the OT, the High Priest was the only one allowed to enter into the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place.
So that is the only application that applies in your parallel.

That's perfectly true. But note that this whole time I was talking about entering into the temple (specifically bolded in my last post). The temple includes 3 sections: the holiest place, the holy place, AND the courtyard. The temple is not just the holiest place & holy place. Once one crosses the threshold to enter into the courtyard one's in the temple proper...and to set foot in the temple one MUST first deal with the bronze altar of sacrifice.

...and just to take this further; with the truth you have in Christ (that you are part of the eternal High Priest's body) remember what Paul says; that "we can come boldly to the throne", which is in the holiest place. We have access to that now as Priests & Kings/Queens because upon Christ's crucifixion the veil between the holiest place and holy place was ripped wide open. So there was no longer a barrier between the two sections. So the path to God is even more open after Christ than it was before...but that path is still.

Holiest Place | Holy Place | Court Yard | (gateway/altar)| <outside the temple>
< -----------------------------Pathway to God---------------------------

As a matter of fact, neither is mine. . .sorry about that.

So my response to Mt 23:11 is the same as my response to Mk 9:35, 10:44, above.

And none of them are about hierarchy in the kingdom.


But that is precisely what Jesus' phraseology means--
there is no difference between what men view as the least and the greatest in his kingdom.
They are equal: the least = the greatest, and the greatest = the least.


"I have made you like God to Pharoah, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet." (Ex 7:1)

Moses would be like God to Pharoah, in that he carried the word of God to Pharoah, and
Aaron would be like a prophet of Moses' to Pharoah, in that he would speak Moses' words of God to Pharoah.

It is an analogy.
The text is stating neither that Moses was God, nor that Aaron was a prophet of God.


Okay, time to back up and regroup.

First, it was not written that Aaron was a prophet of God, as is shown above.
You mistook an analogy for a declaration of reality.

Secondly, I do not understand to what are you referring which is clearly implied in the context and that I am rejecting.


Okay, so this must be to what you are referring that I am rejecting.

You are confusing pre-figure with its reality.

Yes, Moses could be called a pre-figure of Christ as Savior, but Moses cannot be called the Savior.
And even in his role as pre-figure, he was not the Savior, God was.

Just as, in their role as pre-figure, the sacrifices for sin could be called remission of sin.
But they did not remove (remit) sin (Heb 10:4), they only covered it (Ro 4:7), until the reality
of the pre-figures actually remitted it (Heb 9:15, 11:40; Ro 3:25),
as Moses did not actually save them, the reality in Christ saved them.


The parable of the talents is about no fruit (Mt 25:14-30), just as
the unwatchful servant is about no faithfulness (Mt 24: 45-51), and
the five foolish virgins is about no Holy Spirit ( Mt 25:1-3),

all three of which are manifestations of no rebirth, no true faith, and no salvation.


And also "Come, enter into the joy of the Lord." (v. 21)

Well, as everything else in the parables are analagous to the spiritual,
I see this as likewise analogous, first to the parable, where he was given many things
and, therefore, is put over many things,
and secondly, analagous to the spiritual, where our rewards will be a crown (2Tim 4:8),
a throne (Rev 3:21) and a kingdom (Mt 25:34), all emblems of reigning with Christ
in the heavenly realms now (Eph 2:6, 1:20).

Beyond that, I don't think I am willing to go, since it is all so analogous.

And problems still remain for me with your analogies not stacking to with the word of God.

Well that's ok. We probably should leave this part here then .

 

[Yahshua]

i've never said God changes in His Character or Who He is.

i posted this:

Amos 7
2And it came about, when it had finished eating the vegetation of the land, that I said, "Lord GOD, please pardon! How can Jacob stand, For he is small?" 3 The LORD changed His mind about this. "It shall not be," said the LORD. 4 Thus the Lord GOD showed me, and behold, the Lord GOD was calling to contend with them by fire, and it consumed the great deep and began to consume the farm land

it says what it says.

but i like your post

Wait, am I seeing things or has your flag changed Zone? Sorry to derail the thread for a moment.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Ahh, but David was of the order of Melchizedek, an order legally established before the Levitical priesthood. ... David broke no law.

Uh, no. David was not of the order of Melchizedek. He was a shadow, yes, but Psalm 110 is about Christ, not David.

Christ said that David broke the law. It's plainly stated in the verse I quoted.

Note there's a time frame on the restriction of certain parties joining to Israel. Also note that I specifically bolded "all thy days" to show the difference between a temporary restriction (as in "to the tenth generation") and an everlasting one. God would've said "all thy days" if he also wanted Moab kept from Israel, like he told Israel to not help in their peace and prosperity "all thy days" (if I remember correctly, Moab was from Lot the nephew of Abraham...I gotta check this).

10 generations Moab was barred from the assembly of God because they didn't help when Israel as they passed through.

This was written in Deuteronomy so we're at least within the 40 years of wandering...Then we have the generations of Joshua & Judges, AND the time of the Kings, AND the time of the prophets, before Ruth. So it will have to be proven that Ruth was within the 10th generation to prove that God changed his mind on this decree, but I think 10 generations safely passed.

But Deuteronomy 23:3 says that no Moabite will enter the congregation of the lord FOREVER. The 10 generations was just a Hebrew thing that indicated forever.

This doesn't say they will be joining to the people of Israel...and notice, the Eunich from Ethiopia didn't join to Israel but was baptized in the name of Christ, receiving that everlasting name.

...

Conparatively, foreigners are granted access to the actual house of prayer. The Eunichs are never told they'll be able to enter into the temple, but that they'd receive a memorial and name greater than "sons and daughters".

Are you denying that the Ethiopian eunuch did not join the congregation of the lord? Or that he did not become part of the temple (much less enter into it.)?

Honestly, this type of rationalization and glossing over on your part really make me question your sincerity in trying to discern the truth.

 

[Elin]

Oh ok...But if God doesn't change, shouldn't one see God repeating himself in scripture; his actions paralleling former actions? You don't believe this is the case?

Read my response to that.

There are numerous parallels of God in Scripture, but not everything he does is paralleled, or a parallel, as you stated.

note that this whole time I was talking about entering into the temple (specifically bolded in my last post). The temple includes 3 sections: the holiest place, the holy place, AND the courtyard. The temple is not just the holiest place & holy place. Once one crosses the threshold to enter into the courtyard one's in the temple proper...and to set foot in the temple one MUST first deal with the bronze altar of sacrifice.

...and just to take this further; with the truth you have in Christ (that you are part of the eternal High Priest's body) remember what Paul says; that "we can come boldly to the throne", which is in the holiest place. We have access to that now as Priests & Kings/Queens because upon Christ's crucifixion the veil between the holiest place and holy place was ripped wide open. So there was no longer a barrier between the two sections. So the path to God is even more open after Christ than it was before...but that path is still.

Holiest Place | Holy Place | Court Yard | (gateway/altar)| <outside the temple>
< -----------------------------Pathway to God---------------------------

Are you trying to say that the layout of the tabernacle is a pre-figure of Jn 14:6?

On that, we would be in total agreement.

See this.

 

[Yahshua]

Uh, no. David was not of the order of Melchizedek. He was a shadow, yes, but Psalm 110 is about Christ, not David.

Christ said that David broke the law. It's plainly stated in the verse I quoted.

Heb. melech = "king" + tzedek = "righteousness")? The Melchizedek Priestly order is an order of "Kings who operate as priests for God". Because of this fact, High Priest Joshua in Zechariah 6 was ALSO a priest of this order.

Zechariah 6:13

13 Even he shall build the temple of the Lord; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both

...and so was the King of Salem a priest of this order; the originator of the name.

Only priests are allowed to offer sacrifice to God at the temple so how did King Solomon and King David do this?

Everything has two or more witnesses to clearly establish it as a truth, because Christ was the fulfillment thereof...he didn't fulfill anything that was not first established as truth in scripture.

But Deuteronomy 23:3 says that no Moabite will enter the congregation of the lord FOREVER. The 10 generations was just a Hebrew thing that indicated forever.

10 generations = forever? Then what do the 3 sets of 14 generations mean in Matthew 1:17?

17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.

"10 generations" wasn't a special way of saying "forever" in Hebrew.

Are you denying that the Ethiopian eunuch did not join the congregation of the lord? Or that he did not become part of the temple (much less enter into it.)?

Acts 1:6

6 Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”

Recall that this is just before Christ ascends to heaven after reminding them of the promise of the Holy Spirit. What the apostles still didn't understand was that there was another kingdom being established; the kingdom of heaven, not the restored kingdom of Israel. I only mention this to prove to you that the Kingdom of Israel is not Kingdom of Heaven. Just like (you know) the Levitical Priesthood is not the Melchizedek Priesthood.

Eunuchs did not join to the kingdom of *Israel*. And eunuchs did not enter into their Temple (that physical building made with human hands) because God said they couldn't. Eunuchs DID however join the kingdom of God receiving the everlasting name of the Son. God will NOT contradict his word. The congregation of the lord is NOT the people of Israel, because Israel was a living parable for our example to whom the end of the age has been given.

 

[Yahshua]

Read my response to that.

There are numerous parallels of God in Scripture, but not everything he does is paralleled, or a parallel, as you stated.




Are you trying to say that the layout of the tabernacle is a pre-figure of Jn 14:6?

On that, we would be in total agreement.

See this.

Yeah this is great. So you don't see the same exact thing prefigured at Mt. Sinai?

 

[RedTent]

HeRose: If what you say is what scripture is telling us, it means that it is not right to try to obey law, and that God can not be trusted because God tells us one thing one time and another later. So the bible is no good for us. Surely you can't mean that? Your examples of God changing his mind are examples of people not understanding what God is saying. For example, David was so hungry when he ate the shrewbread that he must have food. God was explaining His love comes first.

When it seems God is disagreeing with God, I depend on God as eternal more than my mortal mind. God said He was eternal and does not change. I trust that. I think my life depends on trusting that.

Scripture says to obey. Scripture says to do that even though my obedience doesn't save me, only Christ can do that. Through my faith in God and what scripture says, I try to obey and if I don't I take my disobedience to Christ for forgiveness.

 

[loveme1]

Wait, am I seeing things or has your flag changed Zone? Sorry to derail the thread for a moment.

It happens from time to time