Nothing new about the "new" covenant?

[Elin]

Re: Nothing new about the "new" covenant ?

That's the problem, in no way of any kind is God analgous to you,
nor is your multifarious opinion analgous to his immutable word.

I think “it's spelled “analogous.”

Agreed. . .first mistake I ever made. . .so glad it's over with.

You are actually saying
That's the problem, in no way of any kind is God making you see clearly by comparison.
Nor are your numerous and varied aspects comparable with certain respects to his unchanging word.
It sounds real impressive using uncommon words to describe ones character and understanding of scripture.

Are you saying you are easily impressed?

If the shoe fits wear it.
Comparing Spiritual things with Spiritual is what is supposed to be done.

You can't do that if you don't comprehend the text.

It's like you saying that Hebrews 8:13 has nothing to do with the old and new temple

It doesn't.

because you refuse to compare verses 1 thru 6 with the rest of the chapter, that even goes further
in comparison with chapter 9.

Good case in point.
It's not about comparing vv. 1-6 with the rest of the chapter.
It's about comprehending the purpose of Heb and the context of chps 6-8.

The purpose of Hebrews is to show those, who were considering returning to Judaism because
of rejection and persecution by their families and friends, why they should not lapse back into Judaism.

The whole book is all about the superiority of the new order:
the superiority of God's new revelation (1:1-4),
the superiority of Christ to leaders of the old covenant (1:5--7:28) and
the superiority of the sacrificial work of our High Priest (chps 8-10).

At 6:13 in the second item above, the writer begins giving reasons why
they should believe and hope (6:11,18,19, 7:19) in the new oath (covenant), because of
the certainty of God's promise (6:13--7:10), and
the guarantee of a better covenant (7:11-8:13).

Heb 7:11--8:13 is the context of Heb 8:1-6, wherein you try to shoehorn your theology
via the statement about the "temple" in vv. 2-3.
So let's start with your misstatement there.

Heb 8:1-6 states nothing about a "temple," it states "sanctuary" and "tabernacle."
Let's stay with the wording of the text, it doesn't need improvisation.

". . .because Jesus lives forever he has a permanent priesthood.
Therefore he is able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through him,
because he always lives to intercede for them.
Such a high priest meets our needs--one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners,
exalted above the heavens.
Unlike other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins,
and then for the sins of the people.
He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.
For the law appoints as high priest men who are weak; but the oath which came after the law,
appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever. (Heb 7:24-28)

The point of what we are saying is that we do have such a high priest,
who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven,
and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man. (Heb 8:1-2)

(This refers to the heavenly sanctuary in heaven, not to any kind of temple on earth.)

. . .The high priests serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven.
That is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle:
'See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.'
But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs (high priests) as
the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one,
and it is founded on better promsies. (Heb 8:5-6)

The writer is saying that the heavenly reality is the sanctuary of God's presence,
into which Christ our high priest entered with his own blood (9:11-12).
Moses had to make everything in the tabernacle according to the pattern because
both the tabernacle and its ministry were intended to illustrate symbolically
the only way sinners may approach a holy God and find forgiveness.

Heb 8:1-6 is not about a "temple," and Heb 8:7-13 is about the old covenant which is now obsolete.
The whole chapter is about the guarantee of a better covenant founded on better promises
as the reason these Hebrews should not return to Judaism.

And then there's the warning that to do so would mean they will die in their sins
because they have rejected all over again the only sacrifice for sin.

 

[Elin]

P.S.:

Heb 8:1-6 is not about a "temple," and Heb 8:7-13 is about the old covenant which is now obsolete.

The whole chp. 8 is about the guarantee of a better covenant founded on better promises
which is why the old covenant is obsolete in 8:13,
as well as one of the reasons these Hebrews should not return to Judaism, its covenant is obsolete.

 

[chubbena]

Re: Nothing new about the "new" covenant ?

That's the problem, in no way of any kind is God analgous to you,
nor is your multifarious opinion analgous to his immutable word.

If they have no problem speaking against the Word of God, they certainly have no problem speaking against those who uphold His Word. If they can twist the Word of God, they can certainly twist the word of those upholding the Word of God.

 

[prove-all]

Re: why jews

P.S.:

as well as one of the reasons these Hebrews should not return to Judaism, its covenant is obsolete.

the jews where killed for judaism, sabbath keepers by unholy roman empire and cathloc church.

God gave his oracles to the jews to preserve them, why get rid of them.

we are waiting for the rest of the 144, 000 to come in this way.

I keep the Sabbath day holy as told in the whole bible.

or should i copy a doctrine of men and keep sunday like you want them to ?

“Then shalt thou delight thyself in the [Eternal];
and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth,
and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father:
for the mouth of the [Eternal] hath spoken it”

 

[Elin]

Re: Nothing new about the "new" covenant ?

Do you agree or do you not agree with my one opinion? You. . .cannot chop my one opinion into two and say yes to half and say no to the other half.

Who made that rule?

I made this particular rule for this particular opinion because I know what I'm getting at and I'm willing to explain if only one asks.

What I'm getting at is
God never changes. He has one thought for man which is for man to love Him with all his heart, all his mind and all his strength and the how to is all in His Word.
We cannot agree with some and not with the others.

That's quite a leap, don't you think, from not agreeing with everything you say
to not agreeing with everything God says.

Do I remotely imply not agreeing with me is not agreeing with everything God says?
You have read wrongly. I was giving you an analogy.

That's the problem, in no way of any kind is God analogous to you,
nor is your multifarious opinion analogous to his immutable word.

If they have no problem speaking against the Word of God, they certainly have no problem speaking against those who uphold His Word. If they can twist the Word of God, they can certainly twist the word of those upholding the Word of God.

Agreed. . . .

 

[just-me]

P.S.:

Heb 8:1-6 is not about a "temple," and Heb 8:7-13 is about the old covenant which is now obsolete.

The whole chp. 8 is about the guarantee of a better covenant founded on better promises
which is why the old covenant is obsolete in 8:13,
as well as one of the reasons these Hebrews should not return to Judaism, its covenant is obsolete.

So if Hebrews 8:1-6 is not about the temple is there another place that the priests offered sacrifice?
Hebrews 8:3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.

What other place did the priests offer gifts according to the law?
Hebrews 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:

Is not the tabernacle the same as the temple that Moses had built according to God's instructions in Exodus chapter 25 thru chapter 27?
5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See , saith he , that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

Is not the better covenant based on the sacrifice of Christ, and presenting our bodies as a living sacrifice now that Jesus has become our High Priest, and we are the temple made without hands?
6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

What I am hearing from you is that the shadow of things to come has nothing to do with the High Priest or the temple. That takes Christ out of the equation of the new covenant containing salvation same as if we took the priest out of the equation of the old covenant. Can anybody rightfully neglect these principles? Is there any possible way to deny sacrifice and still claim salvation? I can't.

Have you refused the truth for so long that you are now blind without any chance of repentance?

 

[chubbena]

Re: Nothing new about the "new" covenant ?

so there is one law for you but different for me,

no answer from me im deception, no answer from you, you become an police interrogater.

and Jesus asked a different question, not same one back at them.

Some would make people feel like being interrogated - not by the police but rather by lawyers who just want to win without any regard for the truth. I find it appalling at a Christian forum.

 

[Elin]

The whole book is all about the superiority of the new order[/COLOR]:
the superiority of God's new revelation (1:1-4),
the superiority of Christ to leaders of the old covenant (1:5--7:28) and
the superiority of the sacrificial work of our High Priest (chps 8-10).

At 6:13 in the second item above, the writer begins giving reasons why
they should believe and hope (6:11,18,19, 7:19) in the new oath (covenant), because of
the certainty of God's promise (6:13--7:10), and
the guarantee of a better covenant (7:11-8:13).

Heb 7:11--8:13 is the context of Heb 8:1-6, wherein you try to shoehorn your theology
via the statement about the "temple" in vv. 2-3.
So let's start with your misstatement there.

Heb 8:1-6 states nothing about a "temple," it states "sanctuary" and "tabernacle."
Let's stay with the wording of the text, it doesn't need improvisation.

". . .because Jesus lives forever he has a permanent priesthood.
Therefore he is able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through him,
because he always lives to intercede for them.
Such a high priest meets our needs--one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners,
exalted above the heavens.
Unlike other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins,
and then for the sins of the people.
He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.
For the law appoints as high priest men who are weak; but the oath which came after the law,
appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever. (Heb 7:24-28)

The point of what we are saying is that we do have such a high priest,
who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven,
and who serves in the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man. (Heb 8:1-2)

(This refers to the heavenly sanctuary in heaven, not to any kind of temple on earth.)

. . .The high priests serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven.
That is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle:
'See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.'
But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs (high priests) as
the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one,
and it is founded on better promsies. (Heb 8:5-6)

The writer is saying that the heavenly reality is the sanctuary of God's presence,
into which Christ our high priest entered with his own blood (9:11-12).
Moses had to make everything in the tabernacle according to the pattern because
both the tabernacle and its ministry were intended to illustrate symbolically
the only way sinners may approach a holy God and find forgiveness.

Heb 8:1-6 is not about a "temple," and Heb 8:7-13 is about the old covenant which is now obsolete.

The whole chp. 8 is about the guarantee of a better covenant founded on better promises
which is why the old covenant is obsolete in 8:13,
as well as one of the reasons these Hebrews should not return to Judaism, its covenant is obsolete.

So if Hebrews 8:1-6 is not about the temple is there another place that the priests offered sacrifice?

There is no "temple" stated in Heb 8.

The meaning of Heb 8 is abundantly clear and speaks for itself.

You just need to study it with comprehension.

 

[ELECT]

What in the old covenant can you find in the New and why ? thanks you all

 

[just-me]

There is no "temple" stated in Heb 8.

The meaning of Heb 8 is abundantly clear and speaks for itself.

You just need to study it with comprehension.

OK explain to everyone including me how you come to the conclusion that the new covenant can work without a priest, and without sacrifice.

You are right in saying that I cannot comprehend the new covenant without reference to the temple worship. It just doesn't compute with me.

How does the new covenant work without sacrifice?

 

[just-me]

What in the old covenant can you find in the New and why ? thanks you all

Blood sacrifice for atonement and the remission of sins. We are still exhorted to present ourselves as a living sacrifice. In the old covenant, animals were used, and now it's completed in the sacrifice of Christ. No more animals. The principle is the same so we could comprehend the new covenant in its fullness.

 

[Elin]

OK explain to everyone including me how you come to the conclusion that the new covenant can work without a priest, and without sacrifice.

You are right in saying that I cannot comprehend the new covenant without reference to the temple worship. It just doesn't compute with me.

How does the new covenant work without sacrifice?

What is the promise of the new covenant?

 

[chubbena]

P.S.:

Heb 8:1-6 is not about a "temple," and Heb 8:7-13 is about the old covenant which is now obsolete.

The whole chp. 8 is about the guarantee of a better covenant founded on better promises
which is why the old covenant is obsolete in 8:13,
as well as one of the reasons these Hebrews should not return to Judaism, its covenant is obsolete.

Just my observation:
Hebrews 8:7-8 said the problem is not the covenant itself but rather the fault of the people.
The old covenant is not Judaism and Judaism is not the old covenant.
The covenant through Moses is everlasting (yes there are His Word to back up) so the only way to make it obsolete is to remove the physical temple and priesthood.

 

[chubbena]

Blood sacrifice for atonement and the remission of sins. We are still exhorted to present ourselves as a living sacrifice. In the old covenant, animals were used, and now it's completed in the sacrifice of Christ. No more animals. The principle is the same so we could comprehend the new covenant in its fullness.

His law spoken through Moses is in the new covenant also....because He said I will put my law in your heart in Jeremiah 31.

 

[fredjames]

The foundation of God's throne are the commandments, I don't see how they would be dismantled.

'Abiding' in the New Covenant which is Spiritual for spiritual understanding born again believers and practitioners, also fulfills GOD's initial commandments in them with CHRIST.

 

[just-me]

Originally Posted by just-me

OK explain to everyone including me how you come to the conclusion that the new covenant can work without a priest, and without sacrifice.

You are right in saying that I cannot comprehend the new covenant without reference to the temple worship. It just doesn't compute with me.

How does the new covenant work without sacrifice?

What is the promise of the new covenant?

A question with a question
You tell me explaining how it works without sacrifice.

 

[just-us-2]

What in the old covenant can you find in the New and why ? thanks you all

An illustration of this entire concept of the “old” and the “new/renewed” covenants and how the new is not a separate unconnected entity which made the “old” obsolete, of no value, null and void, can be seen when doing a word study on the various key words, such as: “faultless” in Hebrews 8:7: “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.” According to Strong’s Concordance, the word “faultless” in this verse is the Greek word # 278 ametameletos am-et-am-el'-ay-tos from 1 (as a negative particle) and a presumed derivative of 3338; irrevocable:--without repentance, not to be repented of. Since it was derived from # 3338, I had to follow that back to see how it is described. And on it went but it got quite involved so I am going to skip the long Greek definitions for everything I was led to as I studied and consolidate things.

One thing I noticed was that the Greek word “meta” is part of all of these derivative words and that led me to the word we still use today – metamorphosis. (Strong’s #3339 = metamorphoo met-am-or-fo'-o from 3326 and 3445; to transform (literally or figuratively, "metamorphose"):--change, transfigure, transform) Consider the lowly caterpillar for a moment. The caterpillar hatches from the egg a butterfly laid on a leaf and lives out its life happily munching on the plant where it hatched. It can only eat certain varieties of leaves – a comparison in my own mind of the food of God’s Word that we need to consume to be spiritually nourished. Once it has eaten all it needs to grow as big as it is supposed to (easily compared to God’s timing for each level of His covenant to be accomplished, step-by-step), the caterpillar forms a chrysalis or pupa. I used to think that a caterpillar spun a chrysalis and then emerged, like a spider spins a web, but the caterpillar actually becomes the chrysalis and this is where the transformation we call metamorphosis occurs. While the caterpillar is in the form of the chrysalis, its body is changing – not dying! When all of the forming and changing is complete, the caterpillar emerges as a beautiful butterfly. The butterfly should be seen as a completion of the old, not because the caterpillar was faulty, but because it had its purpose to fulfill just like the levels of God’s covenant have to each be fulfilled so the next stage can be built upon it. The New/Renewed Covenant must be seen as COMPLETION OF THE OLD...NOT FAULTY – just incomplete, which is why Jesus said He came to “FULFILL” and not destroy what God had already set in place.

If one thinks about it, we can’t be born again if we have never been born so that too is based upon something “old” or in existence before the new birth. That reminded me of way back when our kids were young and we had a record of Barry McGuire singing Bullfrogs and Butterflies. And since everything God created has a spiritual application, if one rejects this concept, what does that say about him rejecting God’s perfect creation of which the butterfly is a part? Kill the caterpillar and see if a butterfly is ever produced. Break the cycle and both new and old cease to exist.

Face it, the dynamics are lost if the “old” is discarded.

( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3enBv3MzLI )

 

[just-me]

His law spoken through Moses is in the new covenant also....because He said I will put my law in your heart in Jeremiah 31.

Ya, good point. To tell you the truth, I never thought of explaining it all that way. If there wasn't any law, what else would God have used that He would write on our hearts? Cool! Heaven only knows (pun intended)

 

[chubbena]

There is no "temple" stated in Heb 8.

The meaning of Heb 8 is abundantly clear and speaks for itself.

You just need to study it with comprehension.

Isn't the tabernacle a type for the temple? Isn't the temple a type for the spiritual temple?
The tabernacle was for the Israelites and those came out with them from Egypt by faith in the Holy One of Israel through Moses.
The temple was for the Israelites and those who turned to the same faith in the Holy One of Israel.
The spiritual temple is for the Israelites and gentiles who turn to the faith in the Word of God who is the Holy One of Israel.

 

[StopTheInsanity]

I thought you did a great job in listing the New Testament scriptures...All these scriptures are speaking about God's Spiritual church, and consists of all those people (each, individually a church) sitting in all churches/temples throughout the whole world who live according to the Ten Commandments, and Love their God who IS their Saviour with all their heart and soul and their neighbor as themselves...These are God's people, the elect, the chosen ones, spiritual Israel, etc.