Jesus didn't come to separate the old and new covenants.

[sparty-g]

What Law was changed?

Heb 7:13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

The Law that stated that Aaron and his sons would be Priests. The Law that excluded a Jew (one from the tribe of Judah) from being a Priest.

And even this may only apply in the spiritual/heavenly sense of Him being our personal high priest. I often think about what this means and would love feedback. Consider the following:

Now the main point of what we are saying is this: 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 a mere human being. Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already priests who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This 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 in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises. -- Heb. 8:1-6 (NIV)

And when Paul is confronted in Acts:

Paul looked straight at the Sanhedrin and said, “My brothers, I have fulfilled my duty to God in all good conscience to this day.” At this the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near Paul to strike him on the mouth. Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! You sit there to judge me according to the law, yet you yourself violate the law by commanding that I be struck!” Those who were standing near Paul said, “How dare you insult God’s high priest!” Paul replied, “Brothers, I did not realize that he was the high priest; for it is written: ‘Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people.’” -- Acts 23:1-5 (NIV)


It seems Paul is still respecting the position of the earthly high priest. He also seems to be recognizing that he was out of line by his comment unknowingly directed at a group including the earthly high priest. He even quotes a Torah-Law command (Ex. 22:28), seemingly as evidence of his wrongdoing.

What gives? If the Messiah is the high priest and the earthly high priest has no legitimate position being of an old order in an old covenant now obsolete, then why does Paul address him as the high priest? Why doesn't he speak the truth, "There is no high priest but the Messiah!" instead of backing down once he realized the high priest was present? If the earthly priest is illegitimate, as would be any command connected to the high priest, why does Paul bring a Torah-Law command in a seeming attempt to admit his wrongdoing and how he had transgressed the command? The whole ordeal seems apologetic in tone and an admission of guilt.

These are honest questions.

 

[john832]

And even this may only apply in the spiritual/heavenly sense of Him being our personal high priest. I often think about what this means and would love feedback. Consider the following:

Now the main point of what we are saying is this: 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 a mere human being. Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer. If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, for there are already priests who offer the gifts prescribed by the law. They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This 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 in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises. -- Heb. 8:1-6 (NIV)

And when Paul is confronted in Acts:

Paul looked straight at the Sanhedrin and said, “My brothers, I have fulfilled my duty to God in all good conscience to this day.” At this the high priest Ananias ordered those standing near Paul to strike him on the mouth. Then Paul said to him, “God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! You sit there to judge me according to the law, yet you yourself violate the law by commanding that I be struck!” Those who were standing near Paul said, “How dare you insult God’s high priest!” Paul replied, “Brothers, I did not realize that he was the high priest; for it is written: ‘Do not speak evil about the ruler of your people.’” -- Acts 23:1-5 (NIV)


It seems Paul is still respecting the position of the earthly high priest. He also seems to be recognizing that he was out of line by his comment unknowingly directed at a group including the earthly high priest. He even quotes a Torah-Law command (Ex. 22:28), seemingly as evidence of his wrongdoing.

What gives? If the Messiah is the high priest and the earthly high priest has no legitimate position being of an old order in an old covenant now obsolete, then why does Paul address him as the high priest? Why doesn't he speak the truth, "There is no high priest but the Messiah!" instead of backing down once he realized the high priest was present? If the earthly priest is illegitimate, as would be any command connected to the high priest, why does Paul bring a Torah-Law command in a seeming attempt to admit his wrongdoing and how he had transgressed the command? The whole ordeal seems apologetic in tone and an admission of guilt.

These are honest questions.

Well, the Levitical Priesthood is not done away...

Jer 33:17 For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;
Jer 33:18 Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.

And with even a cursory reading of Ezek 40 - 48 we see that the Levites will offer sacrifices in the Millennial Temple.

 

[john832]

How sure is the promise that there will always be a Levitical Priesthood?

Jer 33:19 And the word of the LORD came unto Jeremiah, saying,
Jer 33:20 Thus saith the LORD; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season;
Jer 33:21 Then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests, my ministers.

Now carefully note, God does NOT say the Priesthood will be practicing continually but He does say they will be in existence as long as there is day and night.

 

[dcontroversal]

Well, the Levitical Priesthood is not done away...

Jer 33:17 For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;
Jer 33:18 Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.

And with even a cursory reading of Ezek 40 - 48 we see that the Levites will offer sacrifices in the Millennial Temple.

Hebrews 7:11-12 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical Priesthood, what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchsedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the prieshood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

vs 17. For he testifieth, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek.

 

[dcontroversal]

So, help me out Dcon, my friend, do you believe that something Paul said overrides something that Christ said?

Key words bolded John.......

Originally Posted by dcontroversal

Originally Posted by john832

And there will always be a number of people who contend that the New Testament epistles override the plain statements of Christ in the gospels.


Both lines of thought above denies the following......

1. Jesus said clearly he had many things to say and teach the disciples but they were not ready to bear up under it...
2. The bible clearly sets forth a progressive revelation of God
3. From MOSES in GENESIS to JOHN in Revelation has been INSPIRED by the SAME JESUS that SPOKE in Matthew, Mark, Luke and JOHN
4. THE words of PAUL are the words of JESUS as PAUL was taught by direct revelation BY JESUS
5. The words of PAUL, Peter, John, JUDE ec. are equally the WORDS of GOD and bear the SAME weight and authority as the words of GOD and or the Words of JESUS while he walked the earth
6. NO matter how you slice and dice, JESUS was UNDER the OLD COVENANT and LAW because the NEW COVENANT was not ratified UNTIL HIS DEATH
7. The ETERNAL truths taught by JESUS in the N.T. church letters are VALID and APPLICABLE unto those who are UNDER the NEW COVENANT!

Now, maybe you guys cannot deal with the above facts and truths...I suggest prayer and study....

 

[sparty-g]

Both lines of thought above denies the following......

1. Jesus said clearly he had many things to say and teach the disciples but they were not ready to bear up under it...
2. The bible clearly sets forth a progressive revelation of God
3. From MOSES in GENESIS to JOHN in Revelation has been INSPIRED by the SAME JESUS that SPOKE in Matthew, Mark, Luke and JOHN
4. THE words of PAUL are the words of JESUS as PAUL was taught by direct revelation BY JESUS
5. The words of PAUL, Peter, John, JUDE ec. are equally the WORDS of GOD and bear the SAME weight and authority as the words of GOD and or the Words of JESUS while he walked the earth
6. NO matter how you slice and dice, JESUS was UNDER the OLD COVENANT and LAW because the NEW COVENANT was not ratified UNTIL HIS DEATH
7. The ETERNAL truths taught by JESUS in the N.T. church letters are VALID and APPLICABLE unto those who are UNDER the NEW COVENANT!

Now, maybe you guys cannot deal with the above facts and truths...I suggest prayer and study.......!

I don't disagree with much of what you say here. My assertion was that people today put the words of the disciples/apostles in the NT epistles above the words of the Messiah. Your lines of reasoning seem to espouse equality but at the same time seem to agree with the assertion that the latter words are, in fact, more important (points 1,2, 6 and 7). God Himself comes in the flesh, the perfect embodiment of spirit, love, wisdom and every other quality of God, but yet we'd rather firmly plant ourselves in the words of humans inspired by the holy spirit than the living embodiment of God Himself! The Messiah was perfect; the disciples/apostles were not, as evidenced by the mistakes we see them make (e.g., Peter separated himself from the Gentiles in Antioch; clearly not perfect and able to make mistakes even while walking in the Spirit). I am not saying that the words of their epistles are not inspired by the Spirit of God and not of equal value to the rest of the written Scripture! What I am saying is that they are not more important nor do they override the words of God-in-the-flesh. That which is revealed to anyone after the Messiah's earthly ministry should not conflict with or override what was said beforehand by the Messiah. If it does, I would posit two possibilities: one of the two conflicting statements is not being understood properly, or the latter statement is false. No matter how you slice and dice it, Jesus is our Messiah and not anyone else who was inspired by the Holy Spirit and speaking the Words of the Messiah. If someone wants to slice and dice the Messiah's words and decide most of them are not for you, go ahead but I won't join them.

 

[dcontroversal]

I don't disagree with much of what you say here. My assertion was that people today put the words of the disciples/apostles in the NT epistles above the words of the Messiah. Your lines of reasoning seem to espouse equality but at the same time seem to agree with the assertion that the latter words are, in fact, more important (points 1,2, 6 and 7). God Himself comes in the flesh, the perfect embodiment of spirit, love, wisdom and every other quality of God, but yet we'd rather firmly plant ourselves in the words of humans inspired by the holy spirit than the living embodiment of God Himself! The Messiah was perfect; the disciples/apostles were not, as evidenced by the mistakes we see them make (e.g., Peter separated himself from the Gentiles in Antioch; clearly not perfect and able to make mistakes even while walking in the Spirit). I am not saying that the words of their epistles are not inspired by the Spirit of God and not of equal value to the rest of the written Scripture! What I am saying is that they are not more important nor do they override the words of God-in-the-flesh. That which is revealed to anyone after the Messiah's earthly ministry should not conflict with or override what was said beforehand by the Messiah. If it does, I would posit two possibilities: one of the two conflicting statements is not being understood properly, or the latter statement is false. No matter how you slice and dice it, Jesus is our Messiah and not anyone else who was inspired by the Holy Spirit and speaking the Words of the Messiah. If someone wants to slice and dice the Messiah's words and decide most of them are not for you, go ahead but I won't join them.

Either God inspired the writers or not....
Either the words are equal in weight and or authority or not....
To deny progressive revelation of the word is to reject the word and what Christ spoke about deeper truths to be given to his disciples but not ready to be received by his disciples and does a disservice to the latter revelations of the word
No one, including me has said the words of JESUS are not for us
There is no contradiction when one understand that Christ was under the law until the New Covenant was ratified by his death

 

[john832]

Key words bolded John.......

Originally Posted by dcontroversal

Originally Posted by john832

And there will always be a number of people who contend that the New Testament epistles override the plain statements of Christ in the gospels.


Both lines of thought above denies the following......

1. Jesus said clearly he had many things to say and teach the disciples but they were not ready to bear up under it...
2. The bible clearly sets forth a progressive revelation of God
3. From MOSES in GENESIS to JOHN in Revelation has been INSPIRED by the SAME JESUS that SPOKE in Matthew, Mark, Luke and JOHN
4. THE words of PAUL are the words of JESUS as PAUL was taught by direct revelation BY JESUS
5. The words of PAUL, Peter, John, JUDE ec. are equally the WORDS of GOD and bear the SAME weight and authority as the words of GOD and or the Words of JESUS while he walked the earth
6. NO matter how you slice and dice, JESUS was UNDER the OLD COVENANT and LAW because the NEW COVENANT was not ratified UNTIL HIS DEATH
7. The ETERNAL truths taught by JESUS in the N.T. church letters are VALID and APPLICABLE unto those who are UNDER the NEW COVENANT!

Now, maybe you guys cannot deal with the above facts and truths...I suggest prayer and study....

So, tell me, do we just disregard the teachings of Christ?

 

[john832]

I don't disagree with much of what you say here. My assertion was that people today put the words of the disciples/apostles in the NT epistles above the words of the Messiah. Your lines of reasoning seem to espouse equality but at the same time seem to agree with the assertion that the latter words are, in fact, more important (points 1,2, 6 and 7). God Himself comes in the flesh, the perfect embodiment of spirit, love, wisdom and every other quality of God, but yet we'd rather firmly plant ourselves in the words of humans inspired by the holy spirit than the living embodiment of God Himself! The Messiah was perfect; the disciples/apostles were not, as evidenced by the mistakes we see them make (e.g., Peter separated himself from the Gentiles in Antioch; clearly not perfect and able to make mistakes even while walking in the Spirit). I am not saying that the words of their epistles are not inspired by the Spirit of God and not of equal value to the rest of the written Scripture! What I am saying is that they are not more important nor do they override the words of God-in-the-flesh. That which is revealed to anyone after the Messiah's earthly ministry should not conflict with or override what was said beforehand by the Messiah. If it does, I would posit two possibilities: one of the two conflicting statements is not being understood properly, or the latter statement is false. No matter how you slice and dice it, Jesus is our Messiah and not anyone else who was inspired by the Holy Spirit and speaking the Words of the Messiah. If someone wants to slice and dice the Messiah's words and decide most of them are not for you, go ahead but I won't join them.

This is exactly what I commented on. Apparently there are those who think that the epistles SUPERCEDE the things that Jesus Christ said.

 

[dcontroversal]

So, tell me, do we just disregard the teachings of Christ?

Is everything written in the bible applicable unto you John......?

 

[john832]

Is everything written in the bible applicable unto you John......?

Let's let Christ answer that...

Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

True or false?

 

[SeaBass]

What Law was changed?

Heb 7:13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.
Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

The Law that stated that Aaron and his sons would be Priests. The Law that excluded a Jew (one from the tribe of Judah) from being a Priest.

There was a change made from the OT law to Christ's NT law. Christ was to be a Priest, yet He could not become a Priest under the OT law for under that law Priests came only from the tribe of Levi, Christ was from the wrong tribe to be a priest...."For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood." So there had to be a change in laws for Christ to become a Priest.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Let's let Christ answer that...

Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

True or false?

Does not the entire Bible, not just the parts the words directly attributable to the Father or the red letters of the gospels, constitute the word of God? After all, didn't the Holy Spirit inspire 40 men (and maybe a woman or two) to record His words? Is the Holy Spirit not God?

Yes or no to all the above?

 

[dcontroversal]

Let's let Christ answer that...

Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

True or false?

So it is applicable for you to

1. Build an ark when it rains?
2. Do you grow a garden and do you give 10% of everything to your preacher
3. Do you sacrifice once a year at the temple
4. Have you been circumcised and is every male in your family circumcised the 8th day
5. HAs your house been cleared of all leaven for the upcoming Passover
6. Do you fast on a regular basis.
7. Do you travel once a year to Israel..to Jerusalem to worship
and on and on and on.......

Not everything written IS APPLICABLE in our AGE and TIME FRAME

So I will ask again....

Does everything written in the bible apply unto you JOHN?

By your answer above you seen to indicate yes......

I will add.....WHEN was MALACHI written, who did it apply to, how many years before JESUS came on the scene and under which Covenant was it lumped?

The 7 or 8 assertions found therein...are you guilty of any of them.....

Do you tithe under the law.....?
10 percent off the top to the priests (preacher) and anything over that an offering......

 

[sparty-g]

Either God inspired the writers or not....
Either the words are equal in weight and or authority or not....
To deny progressive revelation of the word is to reject the word and what Christ spoke about deeper truths to be given to his disciples but not ready to be received by his disciples and does a disservice to the latter revelations of the word
No one, including me has said the words of JESUS are not for us
There is no contradiction when one understand that Christ was under the law until the New Covenant was ratified by his death

I believe they are equal in weight and authority. My basic assertion, once you break it down, is that unequal attention is given to the disciples/apostles words. And I will posit that, in some cases, this is because they are giving greater weight and authority to those latter words. They are equating "progressive revelation" with "greater weight or authority." Whichever "deeper truths" are revealed later should not contradict the earlier truths. Calculus doesn't make basic algebra suddenly wrong; it uses algebra as its base and nothing in algebra becomes false. The numbers still add up! And if someone is messing up the calculus, it might be, in part, because their algebra (or whichever earlier math) is wrong. Forgot to carry the 1, d'oh!

On a somewhat related but kind of different note, many of the OT prophets knew of events well beyond their time and including beyond our time even now. I don't think the progression is as linear as one might try to posit. God revealed to Eve directly about the coming Messiah. There were people after her to whom this was not directly revealed in such a way.

Surely the Sovereign Lord does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets. -- Amos 3:7

But, this doesn't directly tie to what you said about the Messiah and the teaching that the Holy Spirit would bring after His departure. Also, this isn't the topic of this thread, so I'm not going to derail the discussion.

 

[dcontroversal]

I believe they are equal in weight and authority. My basic assertion, once you break it down, is that unequal attention is given to the disciples/apostles words. And I will posit that, in some cases, this is because they are giving greater weight and authority to those latter words. They are equating "progressive revelation" with "greater weight or authority." Whichever "deeper truths" are revealed later should not contradict the earlier truths. Calculus doesn't make basic algebra suddenly wrong; it uses algebra as its base and nothing in algebra becomes false. The numbers still add up! And if someone is messing up the calculus, it might be, in part, because their algebra (or whichever earlier math) is wrong. Forgot to carry the 1, d'oh!

On a somewhat related but kind of different note, many of the OT prophets knew of events well beyond their time and including beyond our time even now. I don't think the progression is as linear as one might try to posit. God revealed to Eve directly about the coming Messiah. There were people after her to whom this was not directly revealed in such a way.

Surely the Sovereign Lord does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets. -- Amos 3:7

But, this doesn't directly tie to what you said about the Messiah and the teaching that the Holy Spirit would bring after His departure. Also, this isn't the topic of this thread, so I'm not going to derail the discussion.

Just one thought here.....

The promise of the messiah as found in Genesis 3:15....what exactly can you understand about JESUS just by that verse alone?

over 3200 hundred years later add Isaiah 53....Now how much do you understand about JESUS<----Nothing about a man named JESUS as his name has not yet been GIVEN until almost 720 YEARS after Isaiah

Now after Gabriel tells Joseph to NAME the SON to be BORN JESUS before his birth...HOW much do you know about JESUS?

Now some 90 years later after the N.T. has been written and the (REVEALING) of revelation what do you know about JESUS?

Progressive revelation is linear and only one who would deny the teaching of the N.T. would reject such a linear revelation of the word of GOD! Especially is they adhere to the LAW, WORKS and the 1st Covenant for the sake of being righteous<--not saying you do this.....!

 

[just-me]

Just one thought here.....

The promise of the messiah as found in Genesis 3:15....what exactly can you understand about JESUS just by that verse alone?

over 3200 hundred years later add Isaiah 53....Now how much do you understand about JESUS<----Nothing about a man named JESUS as his name has not yet been GIVEN until almost 720 YEARS after Isaiah

Now after Gabriel tells Joseph to NAME the SON to be BORN JESUS before his birth...HOW much do you know about JESUS?

Now some 90 years later after the N.T. has been written and the (REVEALING) of revelation what do you know about JESUS?

Progressive revelation is linear and only one who would deny the teaching of the N.T. would reject such a linear revelation of the word of GOD! Especially is they adhere to the LAW, WORKS and the 1st Covenant for the sake of being righteous<--not saying you do this.....!

And also we should never forget that our Lord Jesus Christ created all things and was not only present but the architect of the Old Covenant in order for the New and better Covenant to be built upon His truth of the Old Covenant that has been converted by adding Spiritual understanding to the physical applications.

 

[dcontroversal]

And also we should never forget that our Lord Jesus Christ created all things and was not only present but the architect of the Old Covenant in order for the New and better Covenant to be built upon His truth of the Old Covenant that has been converted by adding Spiritual understanding to the physical applications.

I agree for sure......

 

[BradC]

God, our Father in heaven, His name being holy is immutable....................

"He has never changed and can never change in the smallest measure. To change, He would need to go from better to worse or from worse to better. He cannot do either, for being perfect, He cannot become more perfect, and if He were to become less perfect He would be less than God."

Quote from "The Pursuit of God" written by A. W. Tozer

And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. (Luke 4:4)

Concerning your scriptural mantra, what about this verse and passage in Her 13:7... Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you. (Hebrews 13:17, KJV). Does this have an application and practice in your life as a NT believer in Christ?

 

[Elin]

Hebrews 8:6 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.

...but you knew that.

So the new covenant is totally separate from the old covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Heb 8:7-13).