Does Jesus bring a new Torah with the New Covenant?
04-22-2011, 12:52 PM (This post was last modified: 04-22-2011 01:00 PM by Ne'arYah.)
RE: Does Jesus bring a new Torah with the New Covenant?
Quote:I am of the view that very little of the prophets,if any, remain to be fulfilled.We have some threads that deal with this topic and I'll see if I can find some of them for you to save myself retyping everything out.
In respect to your view I wanted to point out a few things. Once again I thank you for responding. It helps me see where I maybe wrong and etc. Let’s re-read this once more starting with verse 17. The key to verse 18 is a small known secret only given to a chosen few, it’s called reading verse 17 J Just joking but seriously, if we take what you’re saying as accurate then you simply made Jesus double talk over himself, yet alone cut off 366 passages of the new testament that are a result of the law being handed over to the proselyte believer through quotation from the old. I’ll continue after your next paragraph, because it speaks more as to what we see being mentioned here in 17 and 18.
Quote:Luk 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
So what you’ve just present us with was the full meaning of what he was teaching the people in Matthew 5:17-18. We now see Yahushua explaining himself through the law and prophets “concerning him,” which is what I mentioned yesterday if you re-read my comments.
I hate doing this because it comes across like I’m trying to prove you wrong, but notice in Luke 24:44 how your position of him only referencing the law being fulfilled falls apart. He plainly explains “himself” according to the law and “the prophets”. So this would tell us through simple comprehension that we cannot detach the two because some man decided to label one verse 17, and the other 18 in reference to Matthew 5:17-18. I want to keep in mind what you gave me to believe you think…
Quote:He was the fulfillment of what the two had pointed to.
Yesterday I tried to explain myself quickly by stating that in Matthew 5:17 he tells the people until “all” the law and “ALL” the prophets are fulfilled, and for the record here is where we differ. This goes beyond what he accomplished the first time around when we include the term “all.” At this point (today) he has fulfilled the portion containing to him being the Sacrifice, priest, and etc. We know he couldn’t have fulfilled the full meaning of “ALL” the feast because we haven’t gone through judgment to get his full-imputed righteousness. Nor have we seen or heard the last trump blow signaling us that our Messiah has come.
As far as prophecies go that are not complete you can start where we begin. Have the nations become one again? Has Jer 31 been fulfilled completely? Has the anti-Christ come to do the temple wrong according to Ezk 44 through – nearly 7 chapters of reading? Has Jesus rightfully come back as the King of Kings lord of Lords to claim his people, which is to be written on his thigh according to Revelations? Mind you this is what we see taking place in the book of Revelations, that started back in the Prophets)? I don’t want to get on a straw man’s kick, so let us look at some who we should be able to agree knew better than you or I.
So when they had come together, they asked Him, "Lord, at this time are You restoring the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or periods that the Father has set by His own authority (Acts 1:6-7)
I’ve brought us into the story after the cross- Yet we “still” have the disciples asking him about fulfilling all that was mention in prophecy about him. Let us not forget, as you’ve explained, he walked with them for 40 days explaining himself through the law and the prophets. So why this question - and more importantly why did Yahushua answer in the manner that he did (rhetorical question). Yahushua knew his role of what he has and have not fulfilled, and answered them correctly. He told them that he didn’t even know when the time would be because that is not up to him, it’s up to the Father, and only he knows.
On a side note: This is why most if not every single Jew found in Judaism doesn’t believe in Jesus. They fill that his coming for his people was going to be in one big motion not two. However, if one studies the feast days they can see clearly that there are a gap in the feast, which have been fulfilled and those that have not. Knowing that he is the substance of those things leads to the understanding that he will complete the other feast days like (atonement) making us full of his imputed righteousness and more in that time.
The very reason why I use Luke 16:17 over Matthew 5:17-18 is because it leaves no wiggle room for misconception. It tells you everything I’m saying without taking the reader with ways to work around it, well at least believe they can work around it.
Luke 16:17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter in the law to drop out.
The point I’m pointing too is that his aim in Matthew 5:17-18 was not about only the law. It was about the whole pie as he explained in verse 17. To our privilege we have the fact that he didn’t complete all the prophets because I’m teaching you today about Yah, and your teaching me (Jer 31:33-37). More importantly we see that even after his resurrection he admits to not fulfilling “all” the prophets; however, he does explain to them that he fulfilled all things concerning him, in reference to him being the HaMashyiach (the Messiah). This is from the horse’s mouth, not my opinion. In order for you to be correct we would need to rip-out Acts 1 and replace a few words. Then go back in the Old Testament, and remove the temple to be built and a great deal more of scripture that links us to the end-time events. You may as well take the spirit (Ruach) away as well because the other half to that is that we are to be in the land.
Quote:Nearyah if we really were bound to the laws of Moses do you not think God would have provided a way of keeping them…ie retained the priesthood Temple etc.If we were really bound then all of us would be in sin for so many jots and titles that we'd be missing.
This sounds like a trick question but I’ve played the role of bait before… I don’t mind.
What you ask can be answered by going back in the many times the temple was destroyed. When the temple was destroyed did they simply remove the 221 laws that were associated with how to operate in it. Or did they reserve them so that when those called Ezra and Nehemiah would come and rebuild it, they would know what to do. When they rebuilt the city, they continued in the way of Yah fully. Furthermore, we see his feast being kept clearly before the law was even given to the Levites specifically outside the land (Exodus 12:14) each person did the slaying of their own lamb and so on. I’m thinking of the story of David keeping the feast outside of the city, but I cannot think of its address biblically. If I can before the day is out I’ll give you that scripture for research.
Quote:Yet another point, is Jesus not affirming there in the Matthew verse the word of God as standing forever?
I think most of what I already offered explains your final point above. However, I want to comment on something that I feel you did by the way you word your point. I often answer your last question by pointing to some obvious signs in reference to all of Gods covenants. Is there a rainbow in the sky after water drops from heaven? Is that not a sign of how eternal God’s covenants are? So when we see him say do something forever does he really mean it?
Jesus coming, dying, and resurrecting did nothing more but confirm the continuation of the old covenant, which is why a great population of believers call it the renewed covenant (a term I don’t use) to help others grab the truth. When he came he didn’t just jump on the cross for the new comer. The “good news” was the fact that Yisra’el was being restored to good standing through his blood sacrifice from all the hellish things they did to transgress the law (sin). The covenant that needed Yahushua’s blood was the blood covenant that was taken by their forefathers and broken from them down to them that day on. The need of Jesus blood was for God, not you or I. God needed that blood because it was set-apart and pure, and it was the only blood that could remove the law of sin and death. I say this to point to the fact that he didn’t end the covenant with Israel he fix it! And he did so on a better promise (blood). I thank Yah for it! He brought his nations back to standing so that they could now have no condemnation before Yah, and keep the very Torah that most throw away. However, the sin that took them to this subverted place is still called sin today. If you lie, cheat, mix with idolatry, or any such thing according to the law of Moses- you are transgressing the law. This is the same law written on your heart, meaning that the same lies, cheating, and mixing with idolatry will still place you out of Yah’s kingdom i.e., outside of his will.
So when you read the book of Hebrews and it speak of a new law given to a new priesthood, it is not referring to the entire law given by Moses. It is referring to the law (singular) given to the priesthood for offering sacrifices. Another way to say it would be the following.
Hebrews 10:4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. Therefore, as He was coming into the world, He said: You did not want sacrifice and offering, but You prepared a body for Me.
(pick-up in verse 18)
Now where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer an offering for sin. (Hebrews 10:18).
Understanding the book of Hebrews, and what it pertains to
(sin offering) makes the whole book fit perfectly with the other 65 books in the bible. If we take the Law of Moses being taken away from us fully, then we need to explain why we have several laws, feast of Yah, and understanding how to deal with members of the body; let alone the Sabbath day being given to the Greeks from Acts to Revelation. We need to redefine sin if the law of Moses is no longer with us today, and what other way would we know what sin is if not through the law of Moses, be it on a tablet or in your heart. The only time to not love, or not steal, or not honor your mother and father will be when you are in heaven, because then all things in the law have a need no more. This change in law (sacrifice) by no means takes away from the law because Yah told us it was going to happen. So excluding it is actually part of keeping the law and the prophets.
He will make a firm covenant with many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and offering. And the abomination of desolation will be on a wing (of the temple until the decreed destruction is poured out on the desolator."
What we don’t have in the Old Testament is God saying that his law will be removed he tells us the exact opposite. It will be placed on your heart according to Jer 31:33 and more.
I will put My Spirit in you, and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I am the LORD. I have spoken, and I will do [it]." [This is] the declaration of the LORD.
I will place My Spirit within you (and cause you to follow My statutes and carefully observe My ordinances. Then you will live in the land that I gave your fathers; you will be My people, and I will be your God.
So by no means does Jeremiah suffer because of the Law of Moses being active while it is coming to fullness.
Still waiting on the scripture that says Christ does not have to keep the law.
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)