Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Sheshbazzar · 07-01-2011, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

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.

They will sing for joy at so great a salvation wrought in Jesus, the Christ, and to which they have access by faith in him.

Would it give you gas if the redeemed of Israel sang their songs of joy -in their own language?
Using those names which are written in The Hebrew?
rather than praising a mispronounced Gentile name -which is hung upon a Greek idol?
And in which Greek 'name', their enemies abused, robbed, tortured, and murdered their people for so many centuries?

Or is it your wish to just keep on abusing and murdering them until they meekly recite the name of your favorite Greek idol?
Don't hold your breath, cause it ain't gonna happen.

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

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 Hebrews 8:8 refer to all Jews in Hebrews 8:8 ?

Paul did not write the letter to the Hebrews.

My hasty error regarding Paul as the author of Hebrews is conceeded and corrected.
Does that mean you are free to discount the writers usage of ;
"....I will make a new covenant with THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL and with THE HOUSE OF JUDAH:" in Hebrews 8:8 even though by that time they had through Yahweh Elohim's workings been made into the one single nation of Israel? (and with Ten of the Twelve Tribes of Israel unidentifiable and 'lost')

The inspired writer of Hebrews thought it was a yet appropriate usage.
One established by a far greater Authority than himself. Take up your gripe with him or HIM.

You misunderstand me if you think I have a "gripe." But you corrected me for referring to Israel in regard to the covenant, and posted numerous Scriptures with the names Israel and Judah, which I took to mean you saw it as contradiction.

Quote:

As for me, IF Scripture says and it certainly does; "....a new covenant with THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL and with THE HOUSE OF JUDAH:"
that is the way it will stand, and that is the way it will be quoted, at least untill the day that it comes to pass.

Certainly it DOES NOT SAY; "Behold, the days come, saith Yahweh, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Christians."

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

As in what follows here, you were quoting from Romans,
and in Ro 11:26 Paul says, "And thus all Israel will be saved."

And "all ISRAEL" includes "THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL and THE HOUSE OF JUDAH:"

You are repeating the point I made. Do you need to review the post to know what's on first and who's on second?

Quote:

Which wording pointsto review to that day yet coming when Elohim Himself will again identify, separate and designate from among the each member of the Twelve Tribes.
HE will know those from THE HOUSE OF JUDAH, and those from THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL and they shall enter into His gates, according to the names of their Tribes (Matt 19:28 Acts 26:7, Rev 7:5-8, 21:12)

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

The holy root of the tree (Ro 11:16) of God's people is the believing patriarchs.

But it is NOT the holy, believing, faithful Patriarch's that are cut out of that good olive tree, it is the unfaithful and unbelieving Jews that were, and yet arecut out.

It would help if you reread my post. You are arguing what I said there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

It is not the Hebrews of the last 2,000 years who reject Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah.

Quote:

Yes it is the cut off branches of the house of Israel, that rejected YAH'shua the Messiah,

I was clearly speaking of the holy root there, which is not the Hebrews of the last 2,000 years.
Please reread my post. You are arguing my points back to me.

Quote:

whose descendants shall be again en-grafted. The blindness that overtook Israel is only for a season, TILL the fullness of the Gentiles come in, to be fellow heirs in the Promises.

In Romans 11:11-32 Paul is clearly speaking of his contemporary Jewish countrymen.

Yes, he is, and they were 2,000 years ago.
You are arguing my point back to me again.

Quote:

Romans 11:1. I say then, Hath Elohim cast away his people? Elohim forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
Paul speaking of his contemporary countrymen, and of his own portion amongst his contemporary Israelites.

Paul had no portion of his contemporary Israelites' unbelief in Jesus of Nazareth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

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:

And what will be grafted back in at that time and in that Day will be
the 'lost' "HOUSE OF ISRAEL and THE HOUSE OF JUDAH:"

Are you saying the use of "Israel" in the NT is a contradiction of the OT "the house of Israel and the house of Judah"?

Quote:

First of all simon we are on two different tracks here.
It may surprise you to learn that the true"New Testament" is not any book, nor that collection of books, so commonly referred to as being "The New Testement".
The ONLY 'New Testement' of any effective value is the shed blood of YAH'shua the Messiah. (Matt 26:28, Mk 14:24, Heb 9:16-28)
Whoever is covered by this 'testament' is recieved by Him, and delivered by Him, even to such as cannot see, hear, or read a single word in a book.

So you agree that those cleansed by the shed blood of Jesus of Nazareth are delivered from God's just wrath on their sin by that blood?

And Jesus said it is through faith in him that you are cleansed and delivered from God's just wrath on your sin by his shed blood (Jn 3:18, 36).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shesbazzar

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..

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

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

Quote:

We do not see eye to eye. Our perspectives, and our self-identity are not compatible. You are a disciple of that which you name,
I am not a Greek, neither do I speak Greek, nor call upon the names of Greek and Roman statues. And even if I were, I would not.
I AM an E'breth ta'Lameed YAH'shuah ha'Mesheka. v'abed Yahweh Elohi Israel.
As YAH-YAH'weh Elohi Israel is my witness.

With your

1) arguing my own points back to me, and
2) your agreement that the shed blood of Jesus of Nazareth cleanses from sin and delivers from God's just wrath on sin, which Jesus says is received by faith in him (Jn 3:18, 36),

we seem to be pretty much in agreement on everything here.

Quote:

(It matters not if you cannot understand nor recieve my words. The ONE who can, knows perfectly every word, thought, and intent.)

Agreed.

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

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.

We are getting a little closer simon.
But allow me to bring to your attention a few more Scriptures regarding THE LAW. This time not about its permanence, but about its unity.

Exd 12:49 "One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you. (see also Numbers 15:16 and 15:29)

Deu 27:8 And thou shalt write upon the stones ALL THE WORDS OF THIS LAW very plainly......

Deu 27:26 Cursed [be] he that confirmeth not [all] the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 28:58 If thou wilt not OBSERVE TO DO ALL THE WORDS OF THIS LAW THAT ARE WRITTEN IN THIS BOOK,

Jos 1:7 .... OBSERVE TO DO ACCORDING TO ALL OF THE LAW, which Moses my servant commanded thee: turn not from it to the right hand or to the left, that thou mayest prosper whithersoever thou goest.
Isa 42:21 Yahwh is well pleased for His righteousness' sake; He WILL MAGNIFY THE LAW, and make it honourable.

THE LAW exists as a unit. The so called 'Decalogue' (which one of them do you have in mind ?

) is inextricable from the rest of THE LAW of YAHWEH.

The Decalogue was God's legislated moral duty to him, and to one another.
The Levitical laws are ceremonial laws, they are not moral laws.

The two forms of law are separate. The ceremonial laws were set aside, the moral laws were not.

Quote:

With respect to the Jews, -any- LAW within The TORAH that they are breaking, they are guilty of, and thus even to this day are yet in sin.
Messiah was made manifest that His bloo might atone for their trespasses. They no longer offer the blood required by Moses, and yet spurn the blood of Messiah, thus their sin remains upon them. Because without the shedding of innocent blood there is no remission of sins.

Do I understand you correctly that

1) the promised Messiah is Jesus of Nazareth,
2) Jesus of Nazareth's shed blood at his crucifixion was substitutionary sacrificial atonement for sin,
3) non-Christian Jews no longer offer the animal sacrifices, yet spurn the atoning sacrifice (shed blood) of Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah, for their sin,
4) non-Christian Jews remain in their sin and, therefore, under the just wrath of God on their sin, because
5) the shed blood of the atoning sacrifice of Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah, which non-Christian Jews reject, is the only remedy God provides for sin?

This is what I understand you to be saying here. Do I understand you correctly?

Quote:

Do Read Deut 27:15-26 simon, which of these LAWS of Yahweh have passed away?

Those were the terms to which Israel agreed regarding obedience to the Sinaitic covenent, by which God would be justified in his judgments against their disobedience (Rev 16:5,7).

Quote:

Think you that The Holy One of Israel will find pleasure in them who now violate these LAWS of His with impunity?

That is not the issue for them now. The issue now is their rejection of the only remedy provided by God for cleansing the sin of their disobedience, which causes God's wrath to remain on them (Jn 3:38).

Quote:

These were also engraved every word into stone for a lasting memorial and warning.

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davka

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

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

No it does not.

The word "replacing" is not in that passage, nor is it implied. Instead, what is implied is a strengthening of the LAW.

God's words for it are "a new covenant,". . .not like the covenant he made with them

when he brought them out of Egypt, which is the Sinaitic conditional covenant (Ex 19:5).

Quote:

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

And that, my friend, is a contradiction of what the OT says.

Not when you understand the whole Bible, in its own terms, rather than terms extrinsic to it, and imposed upon it
from outside it.

In the Bible's own terms, the NT is a transition rather than a contradiction, from the old order (old wine skin)
to the new order (new wine skin).
Only in terms extrinsic to the Bible, and imposed upon it, can the NT be construed as a contradiction.

Quote:

In Genesis 9, YHWH makes an 'everlasting covenant' with mankind: he will never again flood the entire Earth. He magically changes the laws of physics so that light will refract and form rainbows, as a sign of his covenant.

In Genesis 17, YHWH makes a NEW 'everlasting covenant': the covenant of circumcision. Amazingly, rainbows continue to appear. The old 'everlasting covenant' is still in effect. Which is kind of what one would expect from an 'everlasting covenant.'

A few verses later, YHWH promises yet another NEW COVENANT with Isaac, one which is also "everlasting." And once again, the previous EVERLASTING covenants are not affected.

In Numbers 18:19, yet another NEW COVENANT is made. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected.

In Isaiah 55:3, yet another NEW COVENANT is promised. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected.

In Ezekiel 16:60, yet another NEW COVENANT is promised. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected. In this case, YHWH even promises to continue to remember the previous covenants.

In Ezekiel 37:26, yet another NEW COVENANT is promised. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected.

Are you starting to see a pattern here?

Finally, in Jeremiah 31:31-33, YHWH is quoted thusly:

"The days are coming," declares YHWH, "when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah.
It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them," declares the LORD.
"This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law (lit. My Torah) in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people."

Yet again, another NEW COVENANT is promised. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected.

In fact, the previous everlasting covenant, the TORAH of YHWH, is to be unimaginably strengthened by this promised new covenant. YHWH will put His TORAH in their minds and write it on their hearts.

This passage says nothing about "replacing" one covenant with another. It makes no allusions to the ending of an everlasting covenant. While the Hebrews may have broken the everlasting TORAH of YHWH, there is no indication here or anywhere else in the OT that YHWH will break his everlasting TORAH.

Once again, you are adding to the Bible that which simply is not there.

I'm not adding anything. I am presenting what the Biblical texts say.
Understood in its own terms, the Bible presents the "old covenant" of Jer 31:32 as obsolete (Heb 8:6-7,13).

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perspicuo

Quote:

when the purpose for which the Levitical priesthood and the laws based on it were given is accomplished, they are set aside.

This is a Christian pretext, and addresses the fact of why the Law has been dumped for an amendment.

Does the OT contain an article for amendments? Even if it did, which I am unaware of, still it would be a logical inconsistency to have a loophole for amendment or even radical substitution, alongside "my law is eternal".

So it is clear to you too that the Law is not eternal, you just give a pretext, but then again, it is not eternal, it has been abrogated (discontinuated with authority). Even if God has the authority to do so (and the main thread of the whole Bible is he can do anything he wants), what he said was not true. God is a liar. Another inconsistency, this time with a attribute of God.

"Read my lips: my law is eternal"

Read my lips, the Sinaitic covenant, which God promised in Jer 31:31-32 would be replaced,

was not an eternal covenant, it was a conditional covenant (Ex 19:5).

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Ex

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

The problem this thread is addressing is textual contradiction examined in terms of the whole Bible; i.e., it all has bearing.
In terms of the whole Bible, Mr Kole is to understood the OT in the light of the NT.

Mr. Kole is tendentiously interpreting biblical passages based on the hermeneutics of his local sect of Protestants. Virtually no one here looks at the bible as a univocal, canonical monolith. I'm not real sure who Simon's intended audience is?

Actually, Mr Kole's audience is whomever is interested in Davka's list of Biblical contradictions, accessed in his post here.

simon kole · 07-01-2011, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

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.

They will sing for joy at so great a salvation wrought in Jesus, the Christ, and to which they have access by faith in him.

Would it give you gas if the redeemed of Israel sang their songs of joy -in their own language?
Using those names which are written in The Hebrew?
rather than praising a mispronounced Gentile name -which is hung upon a Greek idol?
And in which Greek 'name', their enemies abused, robbed, tortured, and murdered their people for so many centuries?

Or is it your wish to just keep on abusing and murdering them until they meekly recite the name of your favorite Greek idol?
Don't hold your breath, cause it ain't gonna happen.

iBy all means, change it to Messiaih.

Sheshbazzar · 07-01-2011, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

We do not see eye to eye. Our perspectives, and our self-identity are not compatible. You are a disciple of that which you name.

I am not a Greek, neither do I speak Greek, nor call upon the names of Greek and Roman statues. And even if I were, I would not.

I AM an E'breth ta'Lameed YAH'shuah ha'Mesheka. v'abed Yahweh Elohi Israel.
As YAH-YAH'weh Elohi Israel is my witness.

With your

1) arguing my own points back to me, and
2) your agreement that the shed blood of Jesus of Nazareth cleanses from sin and delivers from God's just wrath on sin, which Jesus says is received by faith in him (Jn 3:18, 36),

we seem to be pretty much in agreement on everything here.

# 2) I do NOT agree with. I do not at all accept the name of your Greek idol.

I do not accept, am not a member, and have no fellowship with -any- 'church', 'congregation', 'denomination', or 'religion' that accepts or employs that 'name'.

That name, and every variant of it, is an profane and accursed thing to all men of my faith. We do not speak it, and are careful to avoid even writing it.

I think this statement ought to be clear enough for you to understand.

Sheshbazzar · 07-01-2011, 07:40 PM

Quote:

The Decalogue was God's legislated moral duty to him, and to one another.
The Levitical laws are ceremonial laws, they are not moral laws.

A Hebrew or a Jew, would have no knowledge nor understanding of The Law.
But always need a Gentile who can not read even a single line of The Torah, to tell them what it is that is written there, and what it is that it means, and how it applies.

Sorry simon, but I ain't buying any flavor of that Kool-Aid you are peddling.

Davka · 07-01-2011, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by simon kole

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davka

No it does not.

The word "replacing" is not in that passage, nor is it implied. Instead, what is implied is a strengthening of the LAW.

God's words for it are "a new covenant,". . .not like the covenant he made with them

when he brought them out of Egypt, which is the Sinaitic conditional covenant (Ex 19:5).

Not when you understand the whole Bible, in its own terms, rather than terms extrinsic to it, and imposed upon it
from outside it.

In the Bible's own terms, the NT is a transition rather than a contradiction, from the old order (old wine skin)
to the new order (new wine skin).
Only in terms extrinsic to the Bible, and imposed upon it, can the NT be construed as a contradiction.

Quote:

In Genesis 9, YHWH makes an 'everlasting covenant' with mankind: he will never again flood the entire Earth. He magically changes the laws of physics so that light will refract and form rainbows, as a sign of his covenant.

In Genesis 17, YHWH makes a NEW 'everlasting covenant': the covenant of circumcision. Amazingly, rainbows continue to appear. The old 'everlasting covenant' is still in effect. Which is kind of what one would expect from an 'everlasting covenant.'

A few verses later, YHWH promises yet another NEW COVENANT with Isaac, one which is also "everlasting." And once again, the previous EVERLASTING covenants are not affected.

In Numbers 18:19, yet another NEW COVENANT is made. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected.

In Isaiah 55:3, yet another NEW COVENANT is promised. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected.

In Ezekiel 16:60, yet another NEW COVENANT is promised. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected. In this case, YHWH even promises to continue to remember the previous covenants.

In Ezekiel 37:26, yet another NEW COVENANT is promised. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected.

Are you starting to see a pattern here?

Finally, in Jeremiah 31:31-33, YHWH is quoted thusly:

"The days are coming," declares YHWH, "when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah.
It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them," declares the LORD.
"This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law (lit. My Torah) in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people."

Yet again, another NEW COVENANT is promised. Again, it is everlasting. Again, previous everlasting covenants are unaffected.

In fact, the previous everlasting covenant, the TORAH of YHWH, is to be unimaginably strengthened by this promised new covenant. YHWH will put His TORAH in their minds and write it on their hearts.

This passage says nothing about "replacing" one covenant with another. It makes no allusions to the ending of an everlasting covenant. While the Hebrews may have broken the everlasting TORAH of YHWH, there is no indication here or anywhere else in the OT that YHWH will break his everlasting TORAH.

Once again, you are adding to the Bible that which simply is not there.

I'm not adding anything. I am presenting what the Biblical texts say.

No, you are not.

You are presenting your interpretation of what the texts mean, not what they say.

Quote:

Understood in its own terms, the Bible presents the "old covenant" of Jer 31:32 as obsolete (Heb 8:6-7,13).

No, it does not. The new testament presents the everlasting covenants of the OT as "obsolete." This is a clear, unambiguous contradiction between the Torah and the letters of Paul.

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.