Soul Invictus

So the Jews couldn't/didn't obey the laws? Can you provide a reference for your assertion that this covenant was conditional. We have a source stating that confirms the thought that the law was binding and valid perpetually in Deut 29:29.

Regards,

Soul Invictus

QitALL

This is something I've always wondered about. According to the Bible, God had several covenants with man (actually, just with His chosen people, but that's a different topic...), the Adamic, Mosaic, Naohic, etc. Every time, man supposedly failed to hold up their end of the bargain, so God started over under a new covenant.

So my question is this:

What's stopping God from starting over again? What if He says, "You know, not enough people are believing, which is what my last covenant (under Jesus), demanded of man. So, I'm starting over." And maybe he already has! Maybe Joeseph Smith, for example, was the new covenant-bringer. But regardless, considering the history of the Biblical God, Christians should be very aware that what their God has said so far does not mean he will honor it forever.

And who will write the next book(s) of the Bible, the ones where God establishes His next covenant?

Magus55

"The time is coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah...This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people" (Jer. 31:31,33).

Kilgore Trout

I was was waiting for you to use the old apologetic stand-by of Jer 31. The problem is, it doesn't apply. If you will read Jer 31:34 you will see that the "new covenant" is not in effect yet because it says EVERYONE will know the lord , so you won't have to to tell anybody about him. Lots of people don't know the lord, so it's not in effect yet. You guys can't even see that Jer 31 is one of the best arguments against Jesus and his "new covenant".

Also note this key phrase in verse 33: "I will put MY LAW in their minds and write it on their hearts." In other words it is the SAME LAW. So everybody will obey the same rules. It's a new covenant, but people will still obey the same rules. He's not going to give them 600 or so rules, and then when they don't obey them, he'll just forget all those. Why don't you read your Torah sometime. You know where it is. It's the first part of the book that you guys don't bother with anymore since god junior said it was out of date. If you read it you will notice that part of the law and the covenant is that when people disobey they will be punished or they must repent. You don't scrap the law because some people aren't obeying it. We have laws against murder and when people disobey that, we punish them, we don't say "Oh, forget it. Let them keep murdering and we'll start a new covenant!"

Also Jer 31 is NOT evidence that the covenant was conditional. It says there will eventually be a new covenant, but it does not say that the current one is null and void. As an example, the Exodus covenant was "new" compared to the Abrahamic covenant, but it did not cancel the Abrahamic covenant. It was an addition to the "old" covenant.

As I keep saying, that's why the Torah has Deut 4:2 and Deut 13 so people don't get away with nonsense like claiming we are in a new covenant when we aren't. Anybody can "claim" we are in a new covenant, but if it goes against the Torah laws, then you know that person is a false prophet.

The only reason you guys can't see these clear points is because of your fear and greed idea behind religion. The Jewish religion doesn't have enough punishment or reward in it so you have to follow christianity even if it defies logic and goes against Judaism.

And I know this argument is going to mean nothing to christians because they use the circular reasoning of first assuming Jesus is god, so anything he says is ok even if it completely goes against the Torah. Using that type of circular logic you would have to say that Islam and Mormonism as well as every cult that ever existed has god's stamp of approval. All you have to do is assume that whoever started the religion was a true prophet and no matter what the religion says, it must be true, because god approves of it. By assuming he's god, you let him get away with anything. If he said "2+2=5" you would have to believe him because who are we to argue with god? This is what every apologetic argument is based on.

Mike(ATL)

For good information about exactly what's going on with the old and new covenants read Hebrews 8 and 9. I recommend reading the NASB version because it has the OT references in all caps with cross references so you can see exactly where this was talked about before. Let me know if you still have questions after reading that, I'm glad to offer any knowledge I have.

**EDIT, Kilgore, I'll get to what you said later tonight hopefully, I have to get to class right now **

Kilgore Trout

I know the book of Hebrews very well. It is full of misqoutes from the Hebrew bible, unfounded statements about the Jewish faith (in other words: lies.) The book of Hebrews proves what I said about Deut 13 and Deut 4:2.

Hate to tell you this, but as I implied in my last post, anybody can make claims about Jesus being some sort of eternal "high priest" up there in the sky, so we don't need the sacrificial system anymore. There is no way to prove it, so it is just unfounded speculation. Using the circular argument that you assume Hebrews is written by god before you even read it is the only way you can not realize what a mess it is.

The book of Hebrews claims "the blood of bulls can never take away sins." So it is calling god a liar. The Torah is full of instructions for sin offerings. All the offerings required in the Torah are very specific and NO deviance from the rules is tolerated by god. That's why Hebrews 9:13-14 is completely wrong when it claims to the effect that since the blood of bulls and goats make good sacrifices, imagine what a great sacrifice the blood of Jesus makes. If god says in the Torah he wants a goat or a bull for a sacrifice thats all he wants. A god-man or whatever you think Jesus is, is not a "better" sacrifice. He is an illegal sacrifice. When you find the part of the Torah that says a god/man would make a cool sacrifice be sure to show it to me.

I'm not going to say much more even though I know plenty of similar examples of how the book of Hebrews is totally at odds with the Torah, and therefore whoever wrote it is a false prophet as per Deut 13. It is also against Deut 4:2 since it adds and takes away from the Torah.

I will reiterate what I said about Jer 31:34 about EVERYBODY knowing the lord. The whole point of that line is that it's supposed to be obvious to everyone in the world that the "new covenant" is in effect so people like the writer of hebrews don't try to pull the wool over everybody's eyes by claiming we are in the new covenant with no solid evidence.

abe smith

Neither the OT nor the New T proves a goddamn thing! And anyone who'ld like to assert that those DO PROVE ANYTHING had better get their evidence on display.

Mike(ATL)

Kilgore, I did not mean to suggest you hadn't read Hebrews. I had given that reference for QitALL since he asked about it.

The author of Hebrews did not assign the designation of High Priest to Jesus arbitrarily. The prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 53 explains that "the coming Servant" (who Jesus claimed to be) was an offering for our iniquities. The author of Hebrews takes what has already been said about the conditionality of the first covenant, the new covenant, and Jesus, and explains what was going on.

The author of Hebrews is saying that the blood of goats and bulls is connected to the perfect sacrificial lamb of Christ. God instructed the Hebrews to do this in the past because it was a part of the first covenant. As the author explains though, this was an old covenant to make way for the newer and better covenant. It's not at odds with the Torah, it's explaining that was the old covenant that the people broke.

Ah, but you can't see that it's one of the best arguments for Jesus! All those with the law on their hearts are those under the new covenant. The law is on our hearts because we have the Holy Spirit. This was not made possible until Jesus atoned for our iniquities.

Actually Jeremiah uses the words NEW covenant, not SAME covenant. But yes, it is still the law of God. Things like not eating unclean meat are no longer necessary because we have a new freedom in Christ. Romans has a lot to say about this. The point is the letter of the law is no longer important because we no longer have all this ritual to go through to be able to make ourselves clean enough to meet with God. The High Priest that used to be necessary to meet with God is Jesus and Jesus has atoned for our sin so that we can meet God's perfect standard. However the Law is on our hearts because we now have the Holy Spirit and we have a very very strong motivation to please God since He made it possible that we can meet with Him.

Jer 31:23 says specifically that Israel had broken the old covenant. However the old is not null and void until the new is established which it has been.

Nothing has been added or taken away from what God said in the NT. It is all a fulfillment of what was said in the OT, Torah included. We are supposed to listen to prophets of God, just not the false prophets. We can tell who are false prophets because we have the Deut 13:2 and 18:22 tests. If the prophet says something will come true and it doesn't, that's a false prophet. If the prophet says go against God, that's a false prophet. Neither of these conditions apply to the NT since they are things that have come to pass and say things that do come to pass and they are not saying go against God.

Give me more credit than that bro. That theory may sound nice to you but things are never that simple.

Opera Nut

I've posted a sermon here before from a Conservative rabbi at Congregation Beth Yeshurun on "why Jesus is not the Messiah" which enunciates the characteristics of the Messiah in the OT, none of which Jesus fulfilled.

This is why Christians and Jews for Jesus irritate me so.
The Christians ignore the OT prophecies and the Jews for Jesus engage in oxymoronic non-logic. I can't even call it "thinking."

It's also one big reasono why I'd much rather hang with Jews than Christians, if I hang with any theists at all.

Soul Invictus

Where is this sermon?