Freethought & Rationalism Archive

schriverja · 07-01-2011, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

Originally Posted by schriverja

Picture is a bad analogy, my bad. A better analogy is a story, such as the Star Wars trilogy. Say Return of the Jedi came out, and Obi-Wan Kenobi was suddenly alive, in the flesh. Or it came out that the Jedi were actually evil and the Sith were the good guys. This would clearly contradict the events of episodes IV and V. Elaborate plot contortions could be made to try to make the contradiction disappear, but they would still break consistency of the story.

Unless it was the intent of the author to do so and which, upon much closer examination of episodes IV and V in the light of episode VI, the continuity could be seen.

Now your just looking past my point on purpose. It is my assertion that when phrasing such as "eternal", "permanent", etc is applied to covenant described in the Hebrew Scriptures (over and over and over and over and over), then texts come along later (100s of years later) that say otherwise, that is a contradiction. An important one, because it is it the heart of Christianity. Spinning it with a phrase like progressive revelation is just wrapping it up in new clothes. Underneath, it is still a contradiction, especially for the one who believes God designed this plan even before creation began.

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by schriverja

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

Originally Posted by schriverja

Picture is a bad analogy, my bad. A better analogy is a story, such as the Star Wars trilogy. Say Return of the Jedi came out, and Obi-Wan Kenobi was suddenly alive, in the flesh. Or it came out that the Jedi were actually evil and the Sith were the good guys. This would clearly contradict the events of episodes IV and V. Elaborate plot contortions could be made to try to make the contradiction disappear, but they would still break consistency of the story.

Unless it were the intent of the author to do so and which, upon much closer examination of episodes IV and V in the light of episode VI, the continuity could be seen.

Now your just looking past my point on purpose. It is my assertion that when phrasing such as "eternal", "permanent", etc is applied to covenant described in the Hebrew Scriptures (over and over and over and over and over), then texts come along later (100s of years later) that say otherwise, that is a contradiction. An important one, because it is it the heart of Christianity. Spinning it with a phrase like progressive revelation is just wrapping it up in new clothes. Underneath, it is still a contradiction, especially for the one who believes God designed this plan even before creation began.

It is God who in the OT says he will make a new covenant with the Hebrews.
The NT letter to the Hebrews reveals the what, the why and the when of it.

I understand what you are saying, and my analogy does not talk past you, it shows the nature of the relationship between the OT and the NT.
You want to separate the NT from the OT as though they have no relationship.
My purview is examination of the whole Bible (meaning it is all authoritative for doctine and belief) in terms of itself.
In terms of itself, it is consistent in what it teaches. In terms of itself, OT revelation is to be understood in the light of NT revelation.
That is my purview.

If you do not accept that prinicple, then I cannot address your question within my purview.

Perspicuo · 07-01-2011, 06:52 AM

So the contradiction is within the OT:
My Law is eternal | I will make a new covenant.

Whoever wrote it just couldn't make up his mind, huh? Or had to re-write when shit hit the fan.

"My Law is eternal"
"Dude, our people just can't make it to these standards"
"Alright. Here goes: I will make a new covenant, and-"
Hey! What happened to My Law is eternal and stuff?"
"Well My Law is eternal, My Law is eternal and shut the f* up! Can't you see I'm writing?"
"Awright, awright!"

Sheshbazzar · 07-01-2011, 06:52 AM

Strange times have indeed come upon us.
A Day wherein even the unbelievers, and atheists can grasp the principals of the workings of The Everlasting Covenant of Yahweh Elohi Israel; The Covenant which He established with Israel His Chosen, to a thousand generations, even forever.

Yet like unto Israel of old, those who think themselves as being the most religious have became blind in their conceits, and slaves to the traditions of men.

They bow down to what has became their Nehushtan and now perform all their services to that reincarnated Serpent on a pole.
But they know not, blind, they do not see, neither do they consider.

And lo, The latter rain is now near at hand, and the appointed time of The Nation of Israel's redemption near to come.

I hear supplications, and the swell of many voices again singing together in one voice in the streets of Jerusalem. For more and more for they who were for so long divided, are now at the long last seeing eye to eye.

Yahweh is even now demonstrating His holy power before the eyes of all the nations.
All the ends of the earth will see the victory of our Elohim.

The days of the reign of Babylon and its king, that old Serpent on a pole, are about to come to their end.
Woe to them. There shall be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.

With the latter rain, in the first month, YAH-Yahweh shall sprinkle many nations;
the kings shall shut their mouths at Him:
For that which has not been told to them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

Strange times indeed, when YAH-Yahweh redeems His people Israel, and magnifies His Law, and makes it honorable and glorious in the sight of all of the nations.

And all the earth shall sing for joy, and sing praises to His Holy NAME in the Day that YAH-Yahweh redeems Zion and all the sons of Jacob His chosen.

schriverja · 07-01-2011, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

Originally Posted by schriverja

Now your just looking past my point on purpose. It is my assertion that when phrasing such as "eternal", "permanent", etc is applied to covenant described in the Hebrew Scriptures (over and over and over and over and over), then texts come along later (100s of years later) that say otherwise, that is a contradiction. An important one, because it is it the heart of Christianity. Spinning it with a phrase like progressive revelation is just wrapping it up in new clothes. Underneath, it is still a contradiction, especially for the one who believes God designed this plan even before creation began.

It is God who in the OT says he will make a new covenant with the Hebrews.

It is people putting words into the mouth of God. God didn't "say" anything. And those people are inconsistent with what they say. The only thing that was deemed important enough for God to write himself was a few commands on a stone, which were destroyed before anyone but Moses got to look at it (Ex 32:15-19)...

Let's be clear, when you are taking the position that any human-authored words are literally God's words, you are taking that position irrationally. The claim of human authors writing on behalf of God is hardly unique to Judaism or to Christianity. You cannot consistently take one to be actually God's words, written by human authors, and reject those of other religions.

Quote:

The NT letter to the Hebrews reveals the what, the why and the when of it.

I understand what you are saying, and my analogy does not talk past you, it shows the nature of the relationship between the OT and the NT.
You want to separate the NT from the OT as though they have no relationship.
My purview is examination of the whole Bible (meaning it is all authoritative for doctine and belief) in terms of itself.
In terms of itself, it is consistent in what it teaches. In terms of itself, OT revelation is to be understood in the light of NT revelation.
That is my purview.

If you do not accept that prinicple, then I cannot address your question within my purview.

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

8. He hath remembered His Covenant forever, The Word which He commanded to a thousand generations.

9. Which [covenant] he made with Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac;

10. And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a Law, and to Israel for an EVERLASTING COVENANT:
~
43. And he brought forth his people with joy, and his chosen with gladness:

44. And gave them the lands of the heathen: and they inherited the labour of the people;

45. THAT THEY MIGHT OBSERVE HIS STATUTES, AND KEEP HIS LAWS;
Praise ye YAH! (hallelu-YAH!)

A 'thousand generations' of Israel. How many years are in a generation of Israel?

40 years? 40x1000= 40,000 years.

20 years? 20x1000= 20,000 years.

A 'thousand generations' is a long, long, long time, certainly much longer than a paltry 3000 years or so.

simon, The New Covenant is real, but it only becomes effective if one dies.

Yes, the New Covenant is real, and the NT says it became effective at the death of Jesus, the new eternal High Priest and Mediator of the New Covenant (Mt 27:28; Heb 4:15, 7:18,22, 8:1-2).

Quote:

This is the reason for our 'baptism', being laid down into that watery grave, the old man dies, and is put to rest, and a new man comes to life and arises from that 'grave'.
This new man is no longer under the curses of the Law, because his baptism is accounted as the death of the flesh, that he might henceforth live forevermore in the spirit.
Once accomplished, that soul thenceforth being accounted as now among those who have died, cannot sin. For Yahweh will no longer impute any sin to those washed and justified by the water, and by the blood. (Psa 32:1-2, Rom 4:7-8)
All things therefore become lawful unto them who are so blessed, but not all things become expedient.

Yet for them that -live in the flesh- The LAW of Yahweh FOREVER remains unto their condemnation.
For without The Law sin is not made manifest, and "sin is the transgressions of The Law;" Wherefore The Law remains that transgressions and sin might abound in the children of disobedience.

But unto Israel Yahweh has spoken; "Be glad then, ye children of Zion, and rejoice in Yahweh your Elohim: for He hath given you the former rain moderately, and he will cause to come down for you the rain, the former rain, and the latter rain in the first month."

"Ask ye of Yahweh rain in the time of the latter rain; Yahweh shall make bright clouds, and give them showers of rain, to every one grass in the field."

"Then shall we know, if we follow on to know Yahweh: His going forth is prepared as the morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth."

"I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, the first rain and the latter rain,"

"Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Master.
Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain."

A small harvest, even a 'wave sheaf', then a long growing season unto the time of the latter rain, after that comes the final great harvest.

Then there shall be great rejoicing in The Feast of Ingathering over the abundance of The Great Harvest. "And so shall all Israel be saved."
hallelu-YAH!

edited to add.
But I see by your above response that your heart is hard set against the receiving of any such good words.

You say; "You know as well as I do that the former refers to the divided kingdom, and Paul is referring to all the Jews."
With what words does Paul refer to all Jews in Hebrews 8:8 ?

Paul did not write the letter to the Hebrews. As in what follows here, you were quoting from Romans,
and in Ro 11:26 Paul says, "And thus all Israel will be saved."

Quote:

You say; "the believing patriarchs." But that clearly is not of whom Paul is speaking in Romans 11:11-32.
Let any one read those words and see your error.

The holy root of the tree (Ro 11:16) of God's people is the believing patriarchs.
It is not the Hebrews of the last 2,000 years who reject Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah.

The NT says those rejectors are the branches which have been broken off from the people of God because
of their disobedience (Ro 11:17,31) of unbelief, in Jesus of Nazareth (Ro 11:19),
and who will be grafted back into the people of God (Ro 11;24) when they welcome Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah.

Quote:

If you must be this dishonest in your reading of the texts, there is nothing more I can offer, other than a prayer for you, for this shame which you bring upon yourself..

Ever the scolding elder.

There is nothing dishonest in my reading of the texts. Each can examine them for himself.

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Weiss

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davka

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Firin' from the hip?

And why does God say he will make a new covenant (Jer 31:31)?

Quote:

BibleGod made lots of covenants. Each one was new. But the making of a new covenant in no way nullified those covenants which went before.

Once again, mega fail. You CANNOT show that YHWH of the OT ever intended his everlasting covenants to be anything other than everlasting.

Are you sure about that?

YHWH states which covenant the New Covenant is replacing (Jer 31:32).

Quote:

But what if a Jew becomes an atheist or a Christian, Buddhist or Hindu? Would the covenant be broken? Can't Jews get out of it by breaking all the rules? What if a Jew just ignores the whole thing?

The NT says YHWH's promise in Jer 31:31 of a new covenant has been fulfilled, and the old covenant no longer exists.

Failte · 07-01-2011, 07:58 AM

Quote:

YHWH states which covenant the New Covenant is replacing (Jer 31:32)..

What about the word "everlasting" means "eventually ends"?

I'll even buy new additional covenants, but an everlasting covenant is, well...everlasting. It isn't invalidated and dropped and ignored.

If the NT says that the covenant has been fulfilled and the old one 'no longer exists' then it wasn't 'everlasting' and thus the OT and NT contradict.

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Poor simon cannot get it through his head that minus The Laws of YHWH, sin is not made manifest, and "sin is the transgressions of The Law;" (1 John 3:4)
Wherefore The Law must needs remain that transgressions and sin might abound -and be made manifest- in the children of disobedience.
Without The Law of YHWH to define what is sin, one may not know what it is that constitutes sin in the eyes of YHWH.

The NT is talking about two kinds of law, the Levitical laws which were based in the Levitical priesthood, and the Decalogue given to Moses on Sinai.

The NT says it is the Levitical laws, and the Levitical priesthood on which those laws were based, that have been set aside as weak and useless, because the priesthood, sacrifices and cleansings made no one perfect (Heb 7:11-12,18).
The NT does not say the Decalogue of Mt. Sinai has been set aside.

Quote:

As Paul said; "I had not known sin, except by The Law." (Rom 7:7)

Paul is referring to the Decalogue there, and the NT does not say it has not been set aside.
It is still in force to show forth sin.
Only the Levitical laws have been aside, along with the Levitical priesthood on which they were based (Heb 7:11-12,18).

Quote:

And sin has not ceased because The Law has not ceased. For this cause Israel is yet under guilt unto this day, in that they cannot do (even if willing) ALL that which The Law requires of them. Yet Israel (the Jews) for the sake of His promises, are predicted to be, by His Mercy, wholly redeemed from that guilt in due time. (Jer 31:33-34)

Yes, the Decalogue has not been set aside, and Israel is under the guilt of it today,
which guilt will be removed in the only way guilt is removed
in the new covenant (which replaces the old covenant--Jer 31:32),
and that is by faith in Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah, and his once-for-all substitutionary atoning sacrifice for the guilt under the law, of those who believe in him.

Quote:

This will not be their doing, but will be His doing,

Belief in Jesus Christ, the Messiah, and his atoning work is always God's doing.

Quote:

when in due season He sends 'the latter rain' abundantly upon the grass of His people Israel. He will pour out His spirit upon them, when He is ready to do so, until then, they cannot be other than as they are, as He has made them to be, for the sake of the saving of the Gentiles.

Agreed.

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perspicuo

So the contradiction is within the OT:
My Law is eternal | I will make a new covenant.

Whoever wrote it just couldn't make up his mind, huh? Or had to re-write when shit hit the fan.

"My Law is eternal"
"Dude, our people just can't make it to these standards"
"Alright. Here goes: I will make a new covenant, and-"
Hey! What happened to My Law is eternal and stuff?"
"Well My Law is eternal, My Law is eternal and shut the f* up! Can't you see I'm writing?"
"Awright, awright!"

The covenant which YHWH said would be replaced in Jer 31:31-32 was not an everlasting covenant.

It was a 'conditional covenant, conditioned on their total consecration to the LORD as his people (kingdom) who live by his rule and serve his purposes in history.

Israel was incapable of total consecration, therefore violated the covenant, and YHWH said he make a new covenant with them which would not be based on their external obedience, but on the power of the Holy Spirit in their hearts to work obedience in them.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-01-2011, 06:52 AM	#313
Perspicuo Moderator - History of Non Abrahamic Religions, General Religious Discussions Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Latin America Posts: 6,620	So the contradiction is within the OT: My Law is eternal \| I will make a new covenant. Whoever wrote it just couldn't make up his mind, huh? Or had to re-write when shit hit the fan. "My Law is eternal" "Dude, our people just can't make it to these standards" "Alright. Here goes: I will make a new covenant, and-" Hey! What happened to My Law is eternal and stuff?" "Well My Law is eternal, My Law is eternal and shut the f* up! Can't you see I'm writing?" "Awright, awright!"

07-01-2011, 06:52 AM	#314
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Strange times have indeed come upon us. A Day wherein even the unbelievers, and atheists can grasp the principals of the workings of The Everlasting Covenant of Yahweh Elohi Israel; The Covenant which He established with Israel His Chosen, to a thousand generations, even forever. Yet like unto Israel of old, those who think themselves as being the most religious have became blind in their conceits, and slaves to the traditions of men. They bow down to what has became their Nehushtan and now perform all their services to that reincarnated Serpent on a pole. But they know not, blind, they do not see, neither do they consider. And lo, The latter rain is now near at hand, and the appointed time of The Nation of Israel's redemption near to come. I hear supplications, and the swell of many voices again singing together in one voice in the streets of Jerusalem. For more and more for they who were for so long divided, are now at the long last seeing eye to eye. Yahweh is even now demonstrating His holy power before the eyes of all the nations. All the ends of the earth will see the victory of our Elohim. The days of the reign of Babylon and its king, that old Serpent on a pole, are about to come to their end. Woe to them. There shall be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. With the latter rain, in the first month, YAH-Yahweh shall sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at Him: For that which has not been told to them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider. Strange times indeed, when YAH-Yahweh redeems His people Israel, and magnifies His Law, and makes it honorable and glorious in the sight of all of the nations. And all the earth shall sing for joy, and sing praises to His Holy NAME in the Day that YAH-Yahweh redeems Zion and all the sons of Jacob His chosen.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.