The new covenant with Christ Jesus

[vic1980]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

So I'm asking for scripture that says that all of Paul's teachings were received personally from Christ. I agreed with that, but it had to be from the Old Testament, as I previously said.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Galatians 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Without the holyspirit how could Paul teach all things about Messiah, teachers is one of the gifts of the Holyspirit.

2 Corinthians 3:6 He has enabled us to be ministers of his new covenant. This is a covenant not of written laws, but of the Spirit. The old written covenant ends in death; but under the new covenant, the Spirit gives life.

1.This is a covenant not of written laws, but of the Spirit.

2.The old written covenant ends in death

Thee laws in the old covenant thou shall not kill, adultary ,and so fourth are still legally bound to unbelivers but not a rigteousman.

God bless big bro

 

[Elin]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

Here's your first quote,

Just curious
if you think Paul used another source besides the words contained in the old covenant to prove the new covenant was valid.

It matters not.

Paul's teaching is authoritative, keeping in mind that
he received it all from Jesus Christ personally.

why did you change the meaning?

Personally? Scripture to confirm that please? The encounter with Jesus was on the road to Damascus. Did Jesus give all the information to Paul then? I think not.

You don't know that Jesus personally gave all Paul's revelation to him?

You're kidding, right?

Change what meaning in the above???

I said the same thing in both places--that Paul received all his revelation from Jesus Christ personally.

Is the revelation that Paul had the same as being told everything that is to teach to the Gentiles?

The Christian churches were made up of both Jews and Gentiles, as in Rome.

Paul gave the revelation he received from Jesus Christ personally to all whom he taught,
Jew and Gentile alike.

It's the same revelation for all those who believe in Christ, there is no Jew or Gentile (Gal 3:28-29).

You are a confusing individual.

Or is it your misunderstanding of the NT that is confusing you?

So I'm asking for scripture that says that
all of Paul's teachings were received personally from Christ. I agreed with that, but it
had to be from the Old Testament, as I previously said.

So you're telling Jesus what he can and cannot reveal to Paul 5 to 8 years after his ascension?

< Folks are the recipients of a lotta' bad teaching out here. >

I's like pulling hen's teeth.

 

[just-me]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Galatians 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Without the holyspirit how could Paul teach all things about Messiah, teachers is one of the gifts of the Holyspirit.

2 Corinthians 3:6 He has enabled us to be ministers of his new covenant. This is a covenant not of written laws, but of the Spirit. The old written covenant ends in death; but under the new covenant, the Spirit gives life.

1.This is a covenant not of written laws, but of the Spirit.

2.The old written covenant ends in death

Thee laws in the old covenant thou shall not kill, adultary ,and so fourth are still legally bound to unbelivers but not a rigteousman.

God bless big bro

What is confusing to me is that it is evident that Elin is trying to deny that Paul used the Torah, Tanakh (law and commandments) with the writings of the prophets to prove the new covenant of Jesus to the gentiles as he was called to do. If he didn't use those scriptures (those being the only sacred writings available at the time) I was wondering if there was a lengthy conversation between Jesus and Paul to enlighten him differently than what was written in the old covenant, and the prophets. Elin said Paul personally received the teachings directly from Jesus which I agreed with. Is she trying to say that Paul didn't teach from the scriptures available in his day? Seems that way to me. I am confused as to what she is really trying to say.

 

[Elin]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

Galatians 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Without the holyspirit how could Paul teach all things about Messiah, teachers is one of the gifts of the Holyspirit.

2 Corinthians 3:6 He has enabled us to be ministers of his new covenant. This is a covenant not of written laws, but of the Spirit. The old written covenant ends in death; but under the new covenant, the Spirit gives life.

1.This is a covenant not of written laws, but of the Spirit.

2.The old written covenant ends in death

Thee laws in the old covenant thou shall not kill, adultary ,and so fourth are still legally bound to unbelivers but not a rigteousman.

What is confusing to me is that it is evident that
Elin is trying to deny that Paul used the Torah, Tanakh (law and commandments)
with the writings of the prophets to prove the new covenant of Jesus to the gentiles as he was called to do. If he didn't use those scriptures (those being the only sacred writings available at the time) I was wondering if there was a lengthy conversation between Jesus and Paul to enlighten him differently than what was written in the old covenant, and the prophets. Elin said Paul personally received the teachings directly from Jesus which I agreed with.
Is she trying to say that Paul didn't teach from the scriptures available in his day? Seems that way to me.
I am confused as to what she is really trying to say.

First of all, OT Scripture wouldn't prove anything to a Gentile who knew nothing about it.

Secondly, I am saying that Paul taught the NT revelation he was given by Jesus Christ personally,

and where applicable, used the OT to explain it, as Jesus showed him.

Paul's teaching is what Jesus Christ gave him, not what he gleaned from the OT.

 

[cfultz3]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

First of all, OT Scripture wouldn't prove anything to a Gentile who knew nothing about it.

Secondly, I am saying that Paul taught the NT revelation he was given by Jesus Christ personally,

and where applicable, used the OT to explain it, as Jesus showed him.

Paul's teaching is what Jesus Christ gave him, not what he gleaned from the OT.

Ellin,

I am sorry, but why then use the Old Testament to explain anything if the Gentiles he was speaking to would not have been convinced about it in the first place?

Did he not glean from the Old Testament that lust was a sin? That all are under sin? That none is righteous, as per the Preacher? That salvation is through faith, as per Abraham? That Gentiles would one day by a part of God's family through the Christ to come?

It seems to me in my opinion, that Paul just needed a walk up call and was given one on the road, with Christ saying, 'Sual, why do you persecute me?' One can only imagine the horror he felt when he realized that the Messiah he was waiting on was the One he was persecuting. And I am sure that the Lord used Old Testament Scripture which pointed to Him to convince Paul that He indeed was that Messiah, just as Paul used 'the foundation of the worship of God' we call the Old Testament to convinced the Gentiles of the same.


Edit:

It is like: this is what I know from the Old Testament and this is why I am convinced that the One I use to persecute is the One who is the Messiah, seeing that he used the Old to convince of the New.

 

[just-me]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

First of all, OT Scripture wouldn't prove anything to a Gentile who knew nothing about it.

Secondly, I am saying that Paul taught the NT revelation he was given by Jesus Christ personally,

and where applicable, used the OT to explain it, as Jesus showed him.

Paul's teaching is what Jesus Christ gave him, not what he gleaned from the OT.

Ellin,

I am sorry, but why then use the Old Testament to explain anything if the Gentiles he was speaking to would not have been convinced about it in the first place?

Did he not glean from the Old Testament that lust was a sin? That all are under sin? That none is righteous, as per the Preacher? That salvation is through faith, as per Abraham? That Gentiles would one day by a part of God's family through the Christ to come?

It seems to me in my opinion, that Paul just needed a walk up call and was given one on the road, with Christ saying, 'Sual, why do you persecute me?' One can only imagine the horror he felt when he realized that the Messiah he was waiting on was the One he was persecuting. And I am sure that the Lord used Old Testament Scripture which pointed to Him to convince Paul that He indeed was that Messiah, just as Paul used 'the foundation of the worship of God' we call the Old Testament to convinced the Gentiles of the same.


Edit:

It is like: this is what I know from the Old Testament and this is why I am convinced that the One I use to persecute is the One who is the Messiah, seeing that he used the Old to convince of the New.

To prove your statement, and disprove Elin's, I submit this scripture of historical events that I'm sure Elin will probably try to re-interpret.

Acts 17:10-12
10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily , whether those things were so.
12 Therefore many of them believed ; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

The scriptures were the testament of the old covenant writings. John also used the same writings that were evident to those he taught.

1 John 2:7 Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.

 

[psychomom]

i've observed a tendency to say that those who adhere to NT teaching that the New Covenant
has made the Old obsolete
are rejecting the Old Testament.

can we just not confuse the two?
the Mosaic Covenant and the Old Testament writings (the Law and the Prophets, if you will)
are not the same things.

God's Word is all beautiful to His people.

So which part of the "OT" is reserved by those who adhere to NT teaching that the New Covenant has made the Old obsolete? In other words, which part of the "OT" is obsolete? Is the ten commandments obsolete? Is the law abolished?

i apologize if what i said was unclear...

i'm NOT saying the OT writings are obsolete.

i AM saying there's a difference between the OT writings and the Mosaic Covenant.

right? i mean, the OT encompasses more than just the Mosaic Covenant, right?

guys...we better hope we're not under the Old Covenant...right?

 

[cfultz3]

i apologize if what i said was unclear...

i'm NOT saying the OT writings are obsolete.

i AM saying there's a difference between the OT writings and the Mosaic Covenant.

right? i mean, the OT encompasses more than just the Mosaic Covenant, right?

guys...we better hope we're not under the Old Covenant...right?

Right!!!! Otherwise, we would be going the wrong direction for the relocated Abraham's Bosom.

 

[just-me]

i apologize if what i said was unclear...

i'm NOT saying the OT writings are obsolete.

i AM saying there's a difference between the OT writings and the Mosaic Covenant.

right? i mean, the OT encompasses more than just the Mosaic Covenant, right?

guys...we better hope we're not under the Old Covenant...right?

Concerning the old covenant in relation to the new covenant, there is something very important for all of us to understand. Jesus said that the law would never be abolished or done away with until heaven and earth passed away. As Paul ministers correctly to put the law in it's proper spiritual place, Jesus also says that man shall live by every word that God has ever spoken which include the law, and the prophets. The old covenant also contains the words of God (that man shall live by) and that Israel agreed to, and then didn't live up to the agreement, or, if you will abide by the covenant.

Now we see that the writer of Hebrews says " In that he saith , A new covenant, he hath made the first old . Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away."

Are these the words of God contained in the covenant that are ready to vanish away? It has to be something else, but what?
If the old covenant vanishes, but the words that the covenant contain don't vanish, it has to be equated with carnality.

Jesus said "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." John 2:19
This temple=old
raise it up=new

The principles are the same in Spirit but vanish in the physical shadow of the fleshly perspective.

1 Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

So all of the word of God is still valid. Jesus didn't come to change what He and our Father in haven initiated before the word existed, Jesus came to change us according to what they initiated.

John 1:28 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.

 

[cfultz3]

Concerning the old covenant in relation to the new covenant, there is something very important for all of us to understand. Jesus said that the law would never be abolished or done away with until heaven and earth passed away. As Paul ministers correctly to put the law in it's proper spiritual place, Jesus also says that man shall live by every word that God has ever spoken which include the law, and the prophets. The old covenant also contains the words of God (that man shall live by) and that Israel agreed to, and then didn't live up to the agreement, or, if you will abide by the covenant.

Now we see that the writer of Hebrews says " In that he saith , A new covenant, he hath made the first old . Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away."

Are these the words of God contained in the covenant that are ready to vanish away? It has to be something else, but what?
If the old covenant vanishes, but the words that the covenant contain don't vanish, it has to be equated with carnality.

Jesus said "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." John 2:19
This temple=old
raise it up=new

The principles are the same in Spirit but vanish in the physical shadow of the fleshly perspective.

1 Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

So all of the word of God is still valid. Jesus didn't come to change what He and our Father in haven initiated before the word existed, Jesus came to change us according to what they initiated.

John 1:28 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.

I am sorry to take away some attention of this post. But, to add a little more understanding to what you just said:

Now do we see why we are taught to die to the flesh and become alive to our spirit? Because now, the method to walking pleasingly before God is through our spirit and not flesh. God's will is eternally the same and He has given us the method to walk as sons, just as His Son did.

Please give Just-me's post a pondering.

 

[Elin]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

Ellin,

I am sorry, but why then use the Old Testament to explain anything if the Gentiles he was speaking to would not have been convinced about it in the first place?

Did he not glean from the Old Testament that lust was a sin?
That all are under sin?
That none is righteous, as per the Preacher?
That salvation is through faith, as per Abraham?
That Gentiles would one day by a part of God's family through the Christ to come?

Have you read the entire NT?
Do you even understand the OT?

You are so locked in your OT paradigm that it is your only reference point.
You can't even think outside it.

Those are all things Christ revealed to him,
and make up only a small amount of what Christ revealed to him.

Paul didn't "figure out from the OT" all that he wrote.
If he could have figured all of it out from the OT,
he never would not have been on the road to Damascus in the first place.

It seems to me in my opinion,

And that is the problem with this whole scenario. . .it has nothing to do with what the NT reports.
It comes from your own head.

that Paul just needed a walk up call

What a whitewash of Paul's self-righteous sinfulness.

and was given one on the road, with Christ saying, 'Sual, why do you persecute me?' . . .And
I am sure that the Lord used Old Testament Scripture which pointed to Him to convince Paul
that He indeed was that Messiah,


Edit: It is like: this is what I know from the Old Testament and
this is why I am convinced that the One I use to persecute is the One who is the Messiah, seeing that he used the Old to convince of the New.

Somebody shoot me!

If you think Paul had to be "convinced" by Jesus in order to believe,
"you err because you do not know the Scriptures nor the power of God."

just as Paul used
'the foundation of the worship of God' we call the Old Testament

The foundation of the worship of God is the Holy Spirit, nothing else.
There is no worship of God apart from the Holy Spirit.

 

[Elin]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

To prove your statement, and disprove Elin's,
I submit this scripture of historical events that I'm sure Elin will probably try to re-interpret.

Acts 17:10-12
10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who
coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.

She wouldn't have to "reinterpret" the Scripture if you would just read them yourself.

11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and
searched the scriptures daily , whether those things were so.
12 Therefore many of them believed ; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

And to whom was Paul preaching in the synagogue. . .Gentiles who did not know or believe the Scriptures,
or to Jews who did know and believe the Scriptures?

This is like re-inventing the wheel.

 

[psychomom]

Jesus said "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." John 2:19
This temple=old

raise it up=new

I am sorry to take away some attention of this post. But, to add a little more understanding to what you just said:

Now do we see why we are taught to die to the flesh and become alive to our spirit? Because now, the method to walking pleasingly before God is through our spirit and not flesh. God's will is eternally the same and He has given us the method to walk as sons, just as His Son did.

Please give Just-me's post a pondering.

i did, i really did...but, Chris, do you really think what our brother said there is what the Lord Jesus meant?

i don't mean to call you out publicly (because i love you and respect you)...just to ask the question.

didn't Jesus mean by "this temple", the temple of His body as opposed to the idea it's the old covenant?
that must have been pretty perplexing to those who heard Him.

but verse 22 goes on to say after Jesus rose from the dead they remembered what He had said
and believed the scripture and the words Jesus had spoken. (i find that and interesting )

just-me, please forgive me if i have misunderstood/misrepresented you?

 

[LEPIDUS]

Luke 16:
17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

 

[KSKJBBeliever]

The covenant is on Hold... Nothing more. We are in the dispensation of Grace as Paul explains it. Once the "Church" (believers/saved) are "Caught Up" with the Lord Jesus (First the dead, then the living), the covenant is back in play.

This is called "Jacobs Trouble" also known as "The Great Tribulation". Simple fact is, the Jews required a sign, and we see in the Book of Acts, Speaking in tongues didn't seem to persuade the Jewish nation to accept Jesus as their Messiah. So Christ, brought Saul(Paul) in, and this is the "Mystery" which was revealed to him. "By grace are ye saved, through faith, not of works lest any man should boast." This is us today.

When "Jacobs Trouble" (The Great Tribulation) comes, the covenant is back in play (Nation of Israel), they will receive a sign, pretty nasty sign.

 

[Elin]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

Concerning the old covenant in relation to the new covenant, there is something very important for all of us to understand. Jesus said that the law would never be abolished or done away with until heaven and earth passed away. As Paul ministers correctly to put the law in it's proper spiritual place, Jesus also says that
man shall live by every word that God has ever spoken which include the law, and the prophets.

And also includes the NT.

The old covenant also contains the words of God (that man shall live by) and that Israel agreed to, and then didn't live up to the agreement, or, if you will abide by the covenant.

Now we see that the writer of Hebrews says " In that he saith , A new covenant, he hath made the first old . Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away."

Are these the words of God contained in the covenant that are ready to vanish away? It has to be something else, but what?
If the old covenant vanishes, but the words that the covenant contain don't vanish, it has to be equated with carnality.

Very creative explanation. . .

separate the covenant from its words,
make the covenant obsolete, but keep its words,
then spiritualize its words so you can keep part of the old covenant.

"Creative. . .but hooey."

The old covenant is obsolete (Heb 8:13).

Read 2Co 3:6-11.

 

[LEPIDUS]

Just-me, this would be my advice to you:

Titus 3:
9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
11Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

However, there may be some who are not being actively engaged on this thread who are curious, and willing to try and understand, that what you are presenting may be true, so I encourage you to continue presenting what The Bible clearly is stating.

 

[Elin]

Just-me, this would be my advice to you:

Titus 3:
9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
11Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.

However, there may be some who are not being actively engaged on this thread who are curious, and willing to try and understand, that what you are presenting may be true, so I encourage you to continue presenting what The Bible clearly is stating.

Double minded. . .

 

[cfultz3]

Re: The new covenant of Christ Jesus

Have you read the entire NT?

Yes

Do you even understand the OT?

Yes

You are so locked in your OT paradigm that it is your only reference point.

Oh....

You can't even think outside it.

Well....

Those are all things Christ revealed to him,

Was he not a Jew and yet, he knew nothing of the Scriptures himself? A Jew of his sect not knowing Scripture?

and make up only a small amount of what Christ revealed to him.

Okay

Paul didn't "figure out from the OT" all that he wrote.
If he could have figured all of it out from the OT,
he never would not have been on the road to Damascus in the first place.

Who said 'all'? But, he sure did connect the dots......

And that is the problem with this whole scenario. . .it has nothing to do with what the NT reports.
It comes from your own head.

Every thought I have ever had has come from my head Every thought needs to come from the head before it hits the paper, even yours and everyone else....

What a whitewash of Paul's self-righteous sinfulness.

okay?

Somebody shoot me!

Love does not murder....

If you think Paul had to be "convinced" by Jesus in order to believe,
"you err because you do not know the Scriptures nor the power of God."

Hi Ellie...faith = persuasion = to agree to a believe . In our case here, to be convinced that Jesus is Lord and that conviction is what we call belief.

The foundation of the worship of God is the Holy Spirit, nothing else.

The founding principles of worshiping one God started with the Jews. God is the same in the Old and in the New, He has not changed. If it is wrong to kill in the Old, then it is wrong to kill under the Law of Love. If it is wrong to worship any other god, then it is wrong to do so under Love.

There is no worship of God apart from the Holy Spirit.

Does not the Holy Spirit convict us when we walk contrary to God's known will? Sure.....I believe we are talking about two different subjects here. Of course, I know we cannot truly worship God without the Spirit who guilds us on the path which God has per-ordained from eternity, a path pleasing to Him.

...................................

P.S. I really do not like talking in this fashion (this post of others), it is so un-Christ like. You speak to hurt, to make one look foolish, to show how ignorant the other is. If you are comfortable in the way you speak and do not take the heed when others tell you how you sound to them, then you need to re-evaluate your definition of what love is.

Of a truth I say, if the way you speak is how a Christian is to be, then please, keep your Christianity to yourself.

Until love is in your heart, I will no longer reply to you.

 

[LEPIDUS]

Double minded. . .

I understand scripture in the context of its entirety, I don't base my understanding on certain scriptures. If what he is presenting may bare truth; I am not willingly going to reject it that easy, I don't want to be rejected by God.

Again, I state, you have not proven yours. If by the off chance your view may bare truth I would be addressing the advice to you. But clearly your behavior, comments, understanding and just overall your negativity is contradicting with scripture.