Promise-Law Connection

[randyk]

There is a connection between the Covenant of Abraham and the Covenant of Moses' Law that is tenuous and temporary. Paul called the Abrahamic Covenant a "promise," and he called the Law "temporary." He saw Christ as the eternal fulfillment of that promise, leading to the fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant. The Law, initially connected to that Covenant, was a temporary fill-in.

Rom 4.13 It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. 14 For if those who depend on the law are heirs, faith means nothing and the promise is worthless, 15 because the law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.

Gal 3.14 He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit. 15 Brothers and sisters, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.

Abraham was promised the salvation of Israel and of many nations of faith. But this covenant was made with Abraham, as well as with Christ, on the basis of circumcision, and it was made with Israel on the basis of the Law of Moses.

Christ did not immediately come to bring final redemption for those under the Law, who remained hindered from access to the Tree of Life. And this was the purpose of the Law, to confirm that access to the Tree of Life was hindered by the guilt of human sin, and to show that the promises of God could not be fulfilled until guilt was completely and finally dealt with.

Gen 3. 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

But God provided hope, through the Messiah, a descendant of Eve, of a means back to the Tree of Life.

Gen 3.14 14 So the Lord God said to the serpent,... 15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”

God's plan of redemption of humanity after the Fall continued with Abraham, and this is what Paul referred to as the "promise"...

Gen 17.1 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him and said, “I am God Almighty; walk before me faithfully and be blameless. 2 Then I will make my covenant between me and you and will greatly increase your numbers.”
3 Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, 4 “As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. 5 No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham, for I have made you a father of many nations. 6 I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. 7 I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8 The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.”
9 Then God said to Abraham, “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised."

The problem was, the Law was given to restrict access to the Tree of Life, while at the same time providing a basis for a relationship between God and Israel. Since the Law restricted access to the Tree of Life, its practice was strictly temporary, until Christ could come and establish both a relationship with God and access to the Tree of Life.

The Law therefore had to be detached, along with circumcision, from the covenant God made with Abraham and with Christ, Abraham's seed. As long as the Law was connected to this covenant, the promise of international salvation could not take place. Relationship between God and Israel would only be temporary.

As I said, the Law established a relationship between God and Israel, but it was a tenuous relationship, conditioned on replacing this temporary enablement of the Law with something permanent. Therefore, the Law had to be detached as a limiting element of this covenant, to enable man to have access to Christ, the source of eternal life.

In what way did the Law inform Israel of the limitations placed on their relationship with God? It set up barriers, including veils and walls, between God and Israel. A priesthood separated God from the people in some respects. And all were unable to approach God without carrying out certain rituals of purification.

Heb 9.6 When everything had been arranged like this, the priests entered regularly into the outer room to carry on their ministry. 7 But only the high priest entered the inner room, and that only once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed in ignorance. 8 The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning. 9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

Good works were required of men by God, while at the same time the Law exposed human sin as preventing them from accessing eternal life. As long as the Law was in effect and connected to Abraham's covenant, eternal life could not be had, and unfettered access to God's salvation could not be had.

Good works, though they be good, would be mixed with bad works, and denial of access to the Tree of Life would continue to be enforced by angels. The best of the saints would be denied, despite their faith in God, the ultimate fulfillment of God's promises, at least until Christ could come and complete their hope.

Gal 2.16 know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

The limitations of the Law are removed when it is recognized that Christ provided final purification for Israel and for the world. Faith in Christ allows us to follow him, the source of eternal life. And following him enables us to live like him and have our flaws atoned for in the process.

Christ alone is the way to the Tree of Life, and the only way to have a blessed and an eternal relationship with God. The Law was temporary, and had to be stripped from the promises contained in Abraham's Covenant.

When Christ died on the cross, he gave up any need for Israel to participate, under the Law, in self-atonement. All the guilt of human sin died with Christ on behalf of those who choose to put their faith in him and to follow him.

Living by his Spirit enables us to both be like him and to be atoned by him. It is the fulfillment of God's promise of redemption. It is the only way back to the Tree of Life. Any return to the Law of Moses condemns us forever.

 

[oyster67]

Aren't you glad that Jesus made it so really-really simple for us...

Matthew
22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
22:39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

 

[randyk]

Aren't you glad that Jesus made it so really-really simple for us...

Matthew
22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
22:39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

It's simple enough to get started on trying to understand it. In the process of trying to understand it, many get troubled along the way, which affects how they accept or distort the truth. My burden is to help those who are struggling, and that takes some work.

For example, I've run into those who think Jesus fulfilled the Law, and didn't destroy it. And so, they falsely conclude that some elements of the Law, as a covenant, remain. But the covenant is gone. The Moral Law of God remains because we were created in God's image--that isn't going to change.

So it helps to understand what God's purpose of the Law was. I think it was to separate those who want to do good on their own, without being in relationship with God, from those who want to both be in God's presence and do good.

It's the difference between being in the Kingdom of God or being in Outer Darkness. The Law was a stepping stone. To remain there is to remain outside of God's Kingdom. Redemption was always designed to bring men not just into good works, but much more, to be made fit for eternal relationship with God. That's what Christ came to do, to make us new.

 

[Blik]

There is a connection between the Covenant of Abraham and the Covenant of Moses' Law that is tenuous and temporary. Paul called the Abrahamic Covenant a "promise," and He saw Christ as the eternal fulfillment of that promise, leading to the fulfillment of thehe called the Law "temporary." Abrahamic Covenant. The Law, initially connected to that Covenant, was a temporary fill-in.

Paul spoke the words of Christ who is eternal. God's law is eternal. So if Paul spoke of a temporary law, we must look for a commandment of the Lord that was temporary to see what law Paul is speaking of.

When the Lord had Moses train the only people who would listen to Him called Israel, God gave them literal commands to help them understand the spiritual law like fleshly circumcision. They helped explained the true law and were temporary.

Psalm 119:142 Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and Your law is truth.

 

[randyk]

Paul spoke the words of Christ who is eternal. God's law is eternal. So if Paul spoke of a temporary law, we must look for a commandment of the Lord that was temporary to see what law Paul is speaking of.

When the Lord had Moses train the only people who would listen to Him called Israel, God gave them literal commands to help them understand the spiritual law like fleshly circumcision. They helped explained the true law and were temporary.

Psalm 119:142 Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and Your law is truth.

As I said, the Moral Law remains forever, as do the Abrahamic promises, or the Abrahamic Covenant. The Covenant of the Law had to be *detached* from the Abrahamic Covenant and the Promises. And that's because the Law of Moses was intended to be a stepping stone.

If we stop there, it will only prevent us from moving on to the Promises. The Law is a restrainer, and will keep us under condemnation unless we look to Christ alone. Our own works will prevent us from getting there. By "our works" I refer to works that we try to do without the Lord's help.

Under the Law Israel did good works with the Lord's help, but could not, while under the Law, achieve the promises. Now that Christ has come, and we can rely on his atonement alone, it is a mistake to return to the Law, to try to atone for ourselves by offerings animal sacrifices through the priesthood at the temple. These things were only intended to take us in the direction of Christ.

Now that Christ has come, we can leave the Law of Moses behind. Christ is our temple, our priest, and our sacrifice. Much better than the physical elements used by flawed priests, the perfect Christ can provide for us his Spirit through his own heavenly means. As God he has no need of an earthly temple, fallible priests, and animal sacrifices.

 

[Blik]

I refer to works that we try to do without the Lord's help.

Under the Law Israel did good works with the Lord's help, but could not, while under the Law, achieve the promises.

Now that Christ has come, we can leave the Law of Moses behind. Christ is our temple, our priest, and our sacrifice. Much better than the physical elements used by flawed priests, the perfect Christ can provide for us his Spirit through his own heavenly means. As God he has no need of an earthly temple, fallible priests, and animal sacrifices.

Mostly, we agree on every point. I think that when we get to the bottom line we simply obey Christ when Christ said to obey Him. That means we work for the Lord, and it it simply work because we have Christ's forgiveness within us and we do not analyze it further.

I think you err when you say that there was they did not achieve the promise in the old testament. In Matthews it is told that the saints who had been kept in sleep awoke and walked the streets of Jerusalem when Christ was crucified. God covered their sins with the symbolic blood of Christ. They were told only that there was no forgiveness without the blood God shed on the altar, they shed the symbolic blood of animals through faith in doing as God told them to do.

We agree, the law did not change through the new covenant and Christ, but what was told in literal terms like cutting skin to signify circumcision changed as the law was written in our hearts. Murder became, as an example, not physical killing alone, but putting others down in our hearts.

 

[randyk]

Mostly, we agree on every point. I think that when we get to the bottom line we simply obey Christ when Christ said to obey Him. That means we work for the Lord, and it it simply work because we have Christ's forgiveness within us and we do not analyze it further.

I think you err when you say that there was they did not achieve the promise in the old testament. In Matthews it is told that the saints who had been kept in sleep awoke and walked the streets of Jerusalem when Christ was crucified. God covered their sins with the symbolic blood of Christ. They were told only that there was no forgiveness without the blood God shed on the altar, they shed the symbolic blood of animals through faith in doing as God told them to do.

We agree, the law did not change through the new covenant and Christ, but what was told in literal terms like cutting skin to signify circumcision changed as the law was written in our hearts. Murder became, as an example, not physical killing alone, but putting others down in our hearts.

Yes, we may only disagree in the smaller, less significant details, but I'm still happy to discuss them. I don't believe Jesus was changing the Law when he added "putting others down" to the command "not to murder." He was actually *explaining* the Law, adding detail. In other words, implicit in the command to "not murder" was the command not to "slay people with your words and hate people in your heart." This was no different from the Law. It was not a change in the Law, nor even an addition to the Law. External commands under the Law also had internal requirements--they were commands of the heart--not just the letter.

What I was saying about the Law is not that it changed or didn't change--it was cancelled! One covenant passed away, and a new one took its place. On the other hand, the Moral Law remains forever, and is connected to all of God's covenants.

I'll have to be honest and say I don't know about those resurrected in the streets of Jerusalem at the time Jesus died. Matt 27.53. I was referring to the system of the Law, which was utterly unable to fulfill the promises God made to Abraham in the *eternal sense.* Certainly, God was able to keep some promises to OT saints for the time being. But eternal fulfillment to any promise of God required the New Covenant of Christ. In just a practical sense, nobody experience a promise eternally unless they are raised from the dead and are able to experience it themselves as eternal beings!

It seems to me that those resurrected were resurrected in their old bodies, just as Lazarus was. He was healed in his old body, and still had to die again! This was not the fulfillment of the eternal promise of glorification, but even in our mortal bodies we can receive the promise of eternal life! Those raised from the dead at Jesus' crucifixion were not likely under the Law any longer, since the Law ended where Christ died! So yes, they did receive the eternal promise, but no--they did not receive that promise while still under the Law.

 

[Blik]

Yes, we may only disagree in the smaller, less significant details, but I'm still happy to discuss them. I don't believe Jesus was changing the Law when he added "putting others down" to the command "not to murder." He was actually *explaining* the Law, adding detail. In other words, implicit in the command to "not murder" was the command not to "slay people with your words and hate people in your heart." This was no different from the Law. It was not a change in the Law, nor even an addition to the Law. External commands under the Law also had internal requirements--they were commands of the heart--not just the letter.

What I was saying about the Law is not that it changed or didn't change--it was cancelled! One covenant passed away, and a new one took its place. On the other hand, the Moral Law remains forever, and is connected to all of God's covenants.

I'll have to be honest and say I don't know about those resurrected in the streets of Jerusalem at the time Jesus died. Matt 27.53. I was referring to the system of the Law, which was utterly unable to fulfill the promises God made to Abraham in the *eternal sense.* Certainly, God was able to keep some promises to OT saints for the time being. But eternal fulfillment to any promise of God required the New Covenant of Christ. In just a practical sense, nobody experience a promise eternally unless they are raised from the dead and are able to experience it themselves as eternal beings!

It seems to me that those resurrected were resurrected in their old bodies, just as Lazarus was. He was healed in his old body, and still had to die again! This was not the fulfillment of the eternal promise of glorification, but even in our mortal bodies we can receive the promise of eternal life! Those raised from the dead at Jesus' crucifixion were not likely under the Law any longer, since the Law ended where Christ died! So yes, they did receive the eternal promise, but no--they did not receive that promise while still under the Law.

You expressed "commandments of the heart" so very well, I kept saying Yeah!! as I read it.

When you state 'God cancelled" I completely disagree. I think God is eternal and every word God spoke is eternal. I know that "cut skin" is not eternal, but the spirit of the reason for cutting skin is eternal for we are to be circumcised. When God gave the old covenant, I think it was an eternal covenant telling of eternal principles. It became obsolete when the law was given in our hearts. The law to keep the Sabbath holy is an eternal law, but the laws having to do with methods to keep it holy is obsolete now that the law is in our hearts.

To me, it is very important to our understanding of God to understand that the first reaction God had when Adam and Eve brought death to man through sin was to offer salvation and forgiveness from sin. The world went on for thousands of years the OT tells us of with millions of people who lived during that time. If there was no grace for all that time, then God is not a merciful God, and all scripture tells of Him is wrong. I don't believe a word of that. God sacrificed animals first thing to cover Adam and Eve, and God is spirit. That covering was not only of their physical bodies, but of their sins. Cain used his own labors for forgiveness and it didn't work. Abel used the symbolic blood of Christ (lambs) for forgiveness and it worked. In Leviticus we are told that blood is required for the forgiveness of sin. The word grace means the forgiveness of sin, and grace is spoken of in the OT. Genesis 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.

 

[randyk]

You expressed "commandments of the heart" so very well, I kept saying Yeah!! as I read it.

When you state 'God cancelled" I completely disagree. I think God is eternal and every word God spoke is eternal. I know that "cut skin" is not eternal, but the spirit of the reason for cutting skin is eternal for we are to be circumcised. When God gave the old covenant, I think it was an eternal covenant telling of eternal principles. It became obsolete when the law was given in our hearts. The law to keep the Sabbath holy is an eternal law, but the laws having to do with methods to keep it holy is obsolete now that the law is in our hearts.

What you're really saying is that Keeping the Sabbath is an eternal, moral law. I don't think it is. I agree that the eternal God has reasons consistent with His eternal character for every law He gave. But that doesn't mean He can't apply temporary laws to temporary conditions. As an example, the covenant of Law was given in the time before Christ came, which was a temporary condition, because ultimately Christ did come, indicating a new situation had arisen, and the Law was no longer necessary.

Why would you need animal sacrifices when Christ offered himself as an eternal sacrifice? Animal sacrifices could never fully atone for sin! Atonement had to come from the heart of God, and not from the works of compromised human beings, even though they had faith when they offered animal sacrifices.

To me, it is very important to our understanding of God to understand that the first reaction God had when Adam and Eve brought death to man through sin was to offer salvation and forgiveness from sin. The world went on for thousands of years the OT tells us of with millions of people who lived during that time. If there was no grace for all that time, then God is not a merciful God, and all scripture tells of Him is wrong. I don't believe a word of that. God sacrificed animals first thing to cover Adam and Eve, and God is spirit. That covering was not only of their physical bodies, but of their sins. Cain used his own labors for forgiveness and it didn't work. Abel used the symbolic blood of Christ (lambs) for forgiveness and it worked. In Leviticus we are told that blood is required for the forgiveness of sin. The word grace means the forgiveness of sin, and grace is spoken of in the OT. Genesis 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.

I couldn't agree more! God bless you for saying it! But those offerings, no matter how good they were, no matter they were genuinely good works, no matter the fact they were offered in faith, they could not bring about resurrection from the dead. They could not bring about eternal life. They could not bring about everlasting atonement. That had to come from the perfect sacrifice--God Himself. God was the one who was offended, and He had to offer forgiveness. All sin is committed against Him, and so all sin can be forgiven simply by Him.

All of the OT offerings made to God worked, but only in anticipation of Christ's final offering. Without Christ, all of the offerings would never have resulted in resurrection to eternal life, or eternal salvation.

All of the works of the Law have to be separated between the images that depicted Christ and the moral law, which is eternal. One is a covenant, and the other was our human calling from the beginning.

Moral law could never bring us salvation. Only Christ could do that. Christ was not under the Law, though he came while under the Law. He was God, and His Law only ever applied to Israel. God is not under His own Law, as given to man. He is only consistent with the morality contained in the Law, because the Law spoke of His moral character.

When Christ came he was under no obligation to serve the Law, since he required no redemption from sin. He was sinless. But he observed the Law only as a model for Israel to follow. He was our Savior, but he was also a model to instruct Israel in righteousness until by his death Israel was liberated from the commandments of the Law.

Yet the Moral Law continues forever, and depicts Christ as he is and always has been. This was our call from the beginning, to be like God and to be His children. We don't need the Law of Moses, nor any of its shadows of Christ, to do this.

 

[Blik]

What you're really saying is that Keeping the Sabbath is an eternal, moral law. I don't think it is. I agree that the eternal God has reasons consistent with His eternal character for every law He gave. But that doesn't mean He can't apply temporary laws to temporary conditions. As an example, the covenant of Law was given in the time before Christ came, which was a temporary condition, because ultimately Christ did come, indicating a new situation had arisen, and the Law was no longer necessary.)

I am truly saying that keeping the Sabbath Holy is eternal. It was established at creation and was part of creation of rest on the seventh day. The Jews said part of this was how far you could walk on the Sabbath and that helping a person in trouble on the Sabbath must not be done because it was work. That was not part of God's law.
But what I interpret scripture as meaning goes much deeper. I think all the old testament was from an eternal God who only spoke truth. That truth was often in literal form made obsolete through Christ and the new covenant.

(Why would you need animal sacrifices when Christ offered himself as an eternal sacrifice? )

It was NOT animal sacrifice, in Isaiah it tells us God hated the sacrifice of animals. It was a symbol of blood shed on the altar for the forgiveness of sin, as we know (they didn't know) that was the blood of Christ.

(They could not bring about everlasting atonement.)

I agree. It was only partial atonement that was completed in Christ as Matthew points out.

(All of the OT offerings made to God worked, but only in anticipation of Christ's final offering. Without Christ, all of the offerings would never have resulted in resurrection to eternal life, or eternal salvation.)

I think Matthew points out to us that God was true to His word to them when God gave them the sacrificial system. They were preserved in sleep until Christ perfected it, but they did not die of their sins.

(Moral law could never bring us salvation.)

This is an eternal truth. The old covenant speaks of rewards for obedience, but never once was there salvation given as part of these rewards. Nothing of God is ever wiped out, and that covenant did not wipe out the sacrificial system.

You are a delight and a blessing, we can talk over our differences. You make me go to the Lord and scripture in prayer. May the Lord bless you and keep you always.

 

[Blik]

"randyk, said: "]What you're really saying is that Keeping the Sabbath is an eternal, moral law. I don't think it is. I agree that the eternal God has reasons consistent with His eternal character for every law He gave. But that doesn't mean He can't apply temporary laws to temporary conditions. As an example, the covenant of Law was given in the time before Christ came, which was a temporary condition, because ultimately Christ did come, indicating a new situation had arisen, and the Law was no longer necessary.)

I am truly saying that keeping the Sabbath Holy is eternal. It was established at creation and was part of creation of rest on the seventh day. The Jews said part of this was how far you could walk on the Sabbath and that helping a person in trouble on the Sabbath must not be done because it was work. That was not part of God's law.
But what I interpret scripture as meaning goes much deeper. I think all the old testament was from an eternal God who only spoke truth. That truth was often in literal form made obsolete through Christ and the new covenant.

Ramdy said: (Why would you need animal sacrifices when Christ offered himself as an eternal sacrifice? )

It was NOT animal sacrifice, in Isaiah it tells us God hated the sacrifice of animals. It was a symbol of blood shed on the altar for the forgiveness of sin, as we know (they didn't know) that was the blood of Christ.

Randi said: (They could not bring about everlasting atonement.)

I agree. It was only partial atonement that was completed in Christ as Matthew points out.

Randi said: (All of the OT offerings made to God worked, but only in anticipation of Christ's final offering. Without Christ, all of the offerings would never have resulted in resurrection to eternal life, or eternal salvation.)

I think Matthew points out to us that God was true to His word to them when God gave them the sacrificial system. They were preserved in sleep until Christ perfected it, but they did not die of their sins.

Randi said (Moral law could never bring us salvation.)

This is an eternal truth. The old covenant speaks of rewards for obedience, but never once was there salvation given as part of these rewards. Nothing of God is ever wiped out, and that covenant did not wipe out the sacrificial system.

You are a delight and a blessing, we can talk over our differences. You make me go to the Lord and scripture in prayer. May the Lord bless you and keep you always.[/QUOTE]

 

[randyk]

I can't answer post #10 because it mixes in my comments and your comments. They need to be properly separated to avoid confusion about who is saying what!

 

[randyk]

I am truly saying that keeping the Sabbath Holy is eternal. It was established at creation and was part of creation of rest on the seventh day. The Jews said part of this was how far you could walk on the Sabbath and that helping a person in trouble on the Sabbath must not be done because it was work. That was not part of God's law.

You apparently have yet to master the fine art of enclosing "bookends" to quotations? I'm referring to QUOTE = and /QUOTE!

You're confusing God's Sabbath rest in creation with Israel's Sabbath rest under the Law. The latter was done in honor of the former, but they were not the same. Obviously. Israel didn't rest from creating the world!

Randy said: (Why would you need animal sacrifices when Christ offered himself as an eternal sacrifice? )

It was NOT animal sacrifice, in Isaiah it tells us God hated the sacrifice of animals. It was a symbol of blood shed on the altar for the forgiveness of sin, as we know (they didn't know) that was the blood of Christ.

God did not hate animal sacrifice except when it was done in an artificial, perfunctory way. It was a specific occasion in which God hated animal sacrifice. Obviously, He wouldn't have initiated such ceremonies if He had hated them!

Randy said: (They could not bring about everlasting atonement.)

I agree. It was only partial atonement that was completed in Christ as Matthew points out.

Randi said: (All of the OT offerings made to God worked, but only in anticipation of Christ's final offering. Without Christ, all of the offerings would never have resulted in resurrection to eternal life, or eternal salvation.)

I think Matthew points out to us that God was true to His word to them when God gave them the sacrificial system. They were preserved in sleep until Christ perfected it, but they did not die of their sins.

Partly agree. Israel died as sinners under the Law, despite making legitimate offerings. But they were not always being punished for their sins. The sin nature causes all of us to die, whether we are living in righteousness or not.

Randy said (Moral law could never bring us salvation.)

This is an eternal truth. The old covenant speaks of rewards for obedience, but never once was there salvation given as part of these rewards. Nothing of God is ever wiped out, and that covenant did not wipe out the sacrificial system.

You are a delight and a blessing, we can talk over our differences. You make me go to the Lord and scripture in prayer. May the Lord bless you and keep you always.

Very kind of you, brother. If you want some help with how to manage the quotations correctly, you can Personal Message me, and I'll give you what I know. I don't know how this particular forum is set up, but I'm assuming there is a way we can chat privately?

 

[Blik]

You apparently have yet to master the fine art of enclosing "bookends" to quotations? I'm referring to QUOTE

You're confusing God's Sabbath rest in creation with Israel's Sabbath rest under the Law. The latter was done in honor of the former, but they were not the same. Obviously. Israel didn't rest from creating the world!

God did not hate animal sacrifice except when it was done in an artificial, perfunctory way. It was a specific occasion in which God hated animal sacrifice. Obviously, He wouldn't have initiated such ceremonies if He had hated them!

Partly agree. Israel died as sinners under the Law, despite making legitimate offerings. But they were not always being punished for their sins. The sin nature causes all of us to die, whether we are living in righteousness or not.

Very kind of you, brother. If you want some help with how to manage the quotations correctly, you can Personal Message me, and I'll give you what I know. I don't know how this particular forum is set up, but I'm assuming there is a way we can chat privately?

Thanks, I appreciate help with this site.

I think the Jewish scholars were right when they said that all scripture is literal, all scripture is spiritual at the same time. They gave five ways of reading seach scripture. This is especially true of the Sabbath. At creation we are to read that Sabbath as a literal commandment to rest from our labors, but it also is a spiritual direction to rest in Christ. No one has ever been "under the law" for that would mean that at some time humans could perform as a God to create their own salvation. That isn't how it is, and never has been. Read Leviticus 17:11. There is absolutely nothing that makes what God tells us not the facts. God is truth.

If Israel died under the law, if there was no salvation for Israel until over 4,000 after creation, then Matthew is not telling us the truth. Matthew said the saints lived. God promised forgiveness of sin under the sacrificial system and God does not ever promise what God does not deliver.

 

[tourist]

Aren't you glad that Jesus made it so really-really simple for us...

Matthew
22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
22:39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

I appreciate simplicity.

 

[randyk]

Thanks, I appreciate help with this site.

I think the Jewish scholars were right when they said that all scripture is literal, all scripture is spiritual at the same time. They gave five ways of reading seach scripture. This is especially true of the Sabbath. At creation we are to read that Sabbath as a literal commandment to rest from our labors, but it also is a spiritual direction to rest in Christ. No one has ever been "under the law" for that would mean that at some time humans could perform as a God to create their own salvation. That isn't how it is, and never has been. Read Leviticus 17:11. There is absolutely nothing that makes what God tells us not the facts. God is truth.

If Israel died under the law, if there was no salvation for Israel until over 4,000 after creation, then Matthew is not telling us the truth. Matthew said the saints lived. God promised forgiveness of sin under the sacrificial system and God does not ever promise what God does not deliver.

Yes, you can copy and paste the QUOTE=... and the /QUOTE (in brackets) anywhere you want a quotation to be separate from your comments. You can stop and interrupt a quotation simply by pasting /QUOTE, and then insert your comments. Then to resume, you can paste QUOTE=... again.

The QUOTE= should include the person whose quote it is, which is located at the start of the quotation. You can just copy the whole thing, including brackets, and paste it where you want the quotation to resume.

So I would answer that Jewish scholars do not determine biblical truth, but only their own opinion, based on their own religious preferences. Nothing in the Bible itself indicates that God's rest after creation implies that mankind must practice rest every seventh day! I go by the Bible itself, and not by Jewish scholars.

Jesus said he is Lord of the Sabbath. That means the Sabbath does not apply to him. If he observed it at all, he was just respecting the fact the Jewish People were, in fact, under Sabbath Law, and he modelled that fact for them. But Sabbath was for *sinful Israel,* and being that Jesus was not a sinner, he had no need to observe such laws.

I agree with your point that we are not under the Law, and the Sabbath Law pointed to our need to rest in Christ. Excellent point! But it is then inconsistent to say that now that we have found rest in Christ's works that we have to continue to rest from our own works. We did that when we first trusted in Christ!

All men died under the Law. The Law just taught what had already become a reality, that the human race was condemned to death after sin had entered into it. Whoever has the sin nature must die. And we all have that--all except for Jesus.

The forgiveness that God offered under the Law was real, but did not eradicate the sin nature. The forgiveness was for certain deeds done, but this forgiveness took place without regard for the fact the sin nature remained. As long as the sin nature remained, mankind would still have to die, whether they were forgiven for various deeds or not.

Forgiveness under the Law did not completely purify from sin. It was just a partial forgiveness, a temporary forgiveness until sin reared its ugly head again. The sin nature will never stop sinning. And even cessation from a single sin does not remove the ever-present sin nature. That is Bible.

 

[SophieT]

For example, I've run into those who think Jesus fulfilled the Law, and didn't destroy it. And so, they falsely conclude that some elements of the Law, as a covenant, remain. But the covenant is gone. The Moral Law of God remains because we were created in God's image--that isn't going to change.

in that case, you will enjoy this forum. kept on your toes you will be

 

[randyk]

in that case, you will enjoy this forum. kept on your toes you will be

So I've been seriously baited.
Can you tell me what awaits me?

 

[JaumeJ]

So I've been seriously baited.
Can you tell me what awaits me?

Jesus teaches us that we should not think He came to desstroy the law rather He came to fulfill it. What do you say about this, His very words?

 

[randyk]

Jesus teaches us that we should not think He came to desstroy the law rather He came to fulfill it. What do you say about this, His very words?

The point he made was that *he* came to fulfill the Law--not us. He only expected Israel to keep his every command under the Law as long as they remained under that covenant. Once he fulfilled that covenant, he expected his every command to be kept under his new covenant.

He didn't destroy the Law. However, Israel failed their part of the covenant agreement. The covenant of Law was broken at the cross--not by Jesus but by Israel, who rejected him.

However, he had come to keep the Law in a different way than Israel obeyed the Law. The Law was given to be obeyed by sinful Israel. But Jesus was not sinful. Therefore, he was not under mandate to obey the Law as a sinner. Rather, he was under mandate to fulfill the Law as redeemer of those who had failed under the Law.

This was the fulfillment of the Law, redeeming Israel from under a Law that couldn't save them. We can argue that point if you like?