SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : A New Covenant

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

by philologos on 2010/8/10 5:37:02

by Phanetheus on 2010/8/10 10:37:46
"In olde Queen's english this verse means exactly what the NKJV states:

"He HATH abrogated the olde"
equals
"IS BECOMING obsolete."

"Hath" is a present tense continuous verb. Abrogation is not yet occured, no matter whether we think so or not."

I fear you understand neither English Grammar nor Greek Grammar.

------------------------------------------------------------
It has not been checked in the greek yet i'll take you at your word. Hebrews will be read through later today and see where the mix-up is.

Scripture does not contradict itself.

To take this verse and say that it stands in opposition to the other scriptures that plainly state otherwise has to be a contextual mistake.

So every other english translation aside from the Revised 1611 A. V. is wrong?
This is highly doubted.

It's wondered if there is another application of the wrong object ("new covenant") to which the verb is pointing or if there is a mix-up with genetives.


Regarding englisth, i was just going by what i have been taught regarding 15th century english, and maybe something was forgotten? Is there something i am ignoring?

It was taught by my Elizabethian english teacher that verbs ending with 'th' are continuous in tense. IF this is not the case for this verb, it is the only instance that has been seen in more than 25 years of using the KJV.

Maybe i just don't understand the way you interpret Koine?

This would hardly be the first time that mixed up tenses or confused subject/object and verbs in relation to them has been proffered as explanation by any of us.


Still, scripture is it's own best interpreter and to say that one verse stands in distinct contradiction to other passages (starting with Hebrews) that make the interpretation false means that the interpretation and commentary are wrong, not the Bible.


The old covenant is not abolished nor abrogated.
To say such is to imply that Jesus is a deciever, as well as John and James and Peter and Jude and Matthew and Luke and Mark.

Whose trying to decieve who?

Perhaps this could be applied to the Levitical order and Laws in conjunction with 'metathesis' of that pertion of the Law. Jesus being our High Priest etc. would apply perfectly in this sense.


God Bless you brother!
Yur lil' kotz,
g

p.s. you have yet to disprove ( with contextual scripture references)anything stated regarding the Law that has been put forth by rookie or phanetheus.

i would to God that we all were not still looking through a glass darkly, yet we still await the Law being in our hearts and written in our minds.

p.s.s. Whenever i go to the U.K. next or you come visit stateside and these yanks who can't understand proper english, it would be nice to meet and share a meal or 4. Do not think there is ill-feelings towards you personally. This is hardly the case.

i pray to God that there were others who would spend at least 1/10th of the time you do learning the scriptures and teaching disciples, rather than spouting off things from in their heads or other books without a scriptural foundation, calling it revelation from the Holy Spirit.

Is it any wonder discernment in the church is all but lost?
Believing wrong things destroys faith.
That's all.

"...when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?"

(note the 'th' there and consider the words mara-natha in affiliation with:

For this reason, do not thrust away your confidence, which HATH magnificent paybacks; because you need endurance, so after you have done the will of God, you might carry away the promise(d reward). For yet a little while, and he arriving will come, and will not delay. Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. Now we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.
( Heb 10.34-39 )
(compare the word 'hath' in Heb. 10.35 with 'hath' in 8.13 as well.)

 2010/8/10 12:13
rookie
Member



Joined: 2003/6/3
Posts: 4803


 Re:

Psa 23:3 He restores my soul; He leads me in the paths of righteousness For His name's sake.
...........................................................

How does God accomplish this work in the life of an OT saint?

Is it by the covenant of Mount Sinai or the covenant of Abraham?

In Christ
Jeff


_________________
Jeff Marshalek

 2010/8/10 12:45Profile









 Re:

by rookie on 2010/8/10 8:45:08

Psa 23:3 He restores my soul; He leads me in the paths of righteousness For His name's sake.
...........................................................

How does God accomplish this work in the life of an OT saint?

Is it by the covenant of Mount Sinai or the covenant of Abraham?

In Christ
Jeff
============================================================

BOTH covenants hinge upon one another.

The Abrahamic covenant made the Sinai covenant valid; even as the Noahic covenant made the Abrahamic covenant valid, and the Adamic covenant made the Noahic covenant valid.

Without the former the latter cannot exist.

Oh, we could say that righteousness is by faith alone. Yet this faith, 'amin', is defined as 'such a confident trust in God that what He says goes no matter what' anything else may seem to indicated to us.

It is through faith(fulness) to God that Everlasting Covenant is walked in.

 2010/8/10 13:06
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

by Phanetheus on 2010/8/10 14:13:06 writes:
"Regarding englisth, i was just going by what i have been taught regarding 15th century english, and maybe something was forgotten? Is there something i am ignoring?

It was taught by my Elizabethian english teacher that verbs ending with 'th' are continuous in tense. IF this is not the case for this verb, it is the only instance that has been seen in more than 25 years of using the KJV."

Your misunderstanding of Tudor English grammar is so total that I hardly know where to start to put it right. I don't want to waste folks times doing a tutorial on English at this point. If you are interested in the English Perfect tense please read the wiki item here...

http://bit.ly/dbM8Y4

The English Perfect tense is often known as the pluperfect.

by Phanetheus on 2010/8/10 14:13:06 writes:"
Maybe i just don't understand the way you interpret Koine?

This has nothing to do with the interpretation of the Biblical Greek. This is simple exegesis. I am not interpreting I am translating. There is no way that the Greek perfect tense should be confused with an English Continuous Present.

by Phanetheus on 2010/8/10 14:13:06 writes:
It has not been checked in the greek yet i'll take you at your word. Hebrews will be read through later today and see where the mix-up is.

I respectfully suggest that you do your 'checking' before you do your posting. This will save you embarrassment and your readers any confusion.

by Phanetheus on 2010/8/10 14:13:06 writes:
The old covenant is not abolished nor abrogated.
To say such is to imply that Jesus is a deciever, as well as John and James and Peter and Jude and Matthew and Luke and Mark.

I think you are reverting to your old position of 'I have made my mind up, don't confuse me with the facts'.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2010/8/10 14:15Profile









 Re:

by philologos on 2010/8/10 5:37:02
I fear you understand neither English Grammar nor Greek Grammar.
------------------------------------------------------------
FYI,
It's suspected you are straigning at gnats and in the process swallowing camels.

The gk checks with what you say however conclusion drawn regarding this verse is faulty. Verb tenses in this verse are quite a bit more important here than most are willing to take the time to consider, which has not been done inticated in what you state.

It both a contextual error and a failure to estimate the ramification of meaning behind the verb usage in Heb. 8.13 .

Widen those horizons, and just because on thing is focused on, one cannot disregard the things surrounding it.

This verse does not infer that moral laws, civil laws, Holydays (with Shabbats), etc. are ready to vanish.

Look Paul in II Cor. 2.6 said that the world leaders are passing away in the same sense used here in Heb, 8.13; but do we still have world leaders?????

Now this book Hebrews had to have been written by one quite adept in Judaism, or none of the things here would even be mentioned.
(Personally, looking to the end of the letter there is allusion that most likely Paul is the source.)

Anyway, whoever wrote it was well aware that the Mosaic Covenant is eternal.

Context shows clearly that the author is writing regarding only priestly systematics and sacrafice.

Regarding verb tenses, without getting too detailed for everybody else to understand, let's relate context in a way that clarifies it clearly enough without confising your casual reader. What is on the verge of vanishing, as this verse could be considered prophecy, is the priestly system.

(Recall II Cor. 2.6's reference to world leader's passing ? Heb. 8.13 is written in the same words.)

Since moral laws make up the majority of the Sinai Covenant, it is hardly even possible that the whole Covenant is abrogated. If it were, then nobody, saved or otherwise, would even have to obey any laws at all. (Facts are, the commandments Jesus gave are all comprised within the Law.)

The very nature of God stands behind the old covenant law, so to say it is abrogated or even changed one could say the same about God:



GOD IS:

1. Unchanging
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Mt. 5.18

2. Righteousness
My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness.
Ps. 119.172

3. Righteous
That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit
Rom. 8.4

4. Just
Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
Rom. 7.12

5. Good
But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;
I Tim. 1.8

6. Faithful
All thy commandments are faithful.
Ps. 119.86a

7. Perfect
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
Ps. 19.7

8. Great
I have written to him the great things of my law, but they were counted as a strange thing.
Hos. 8.12

9. Holy
Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
Rom. 7.12

10. Pure
The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
Ps. 19.8

11. True
Thou camest down also upon mount Sinai, and spakest with them from heaven, and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments.
Neh. 9.13

12. Light
For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life
Prov. 6.23

13. Spirit
For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Rom. 7.14

There are other things describing God's nature and character, but in just the few off the top of this noggin', there is more than one verse that says the same thing about the law. The law is God's expression of God's nature and character to mankind.

Jesus is the manifestation of this. We are to walk as Jesus walked: By the spirit in obedience to Law, which is love.

The old Torah of Sinai, the Everlasting Covenant, which God backs up by His very nature is not passing away. The Law continues with the same purpose intended since given: to convict of sin and to live mightily in the land you posess.

Finally, if the afore-mentioned is not proof enough, the old sacraficial system is the subject of the whole letter of Hebrews, and to bring in other things that are not part of the priesthood and it's sacrafices is to alter what is the intended meaning of the whole letter.

Quit adding things that are not there.

The scriptures state three times that by two or three witnesses shall all things be established. So, since this is the only verse that is claimed to say what has been written on this thread --(being misunderstood out of context, and disregarding the full import of the verbs) there are no grounds what-so-ever to establish this verse alone as the basis towards any doctrine that will stand.

...or do you have any cross-references outside of theis book about the metathesis of the Levitical way being abrogated because of what Jesus Christ, our High Priest has done?

The priesthood of Melchizedek superceeds the Levites as in it precedent was set through Abraham and the King of Salem.

The Law is still in effect and will be until heaven and earth pass away.

The priesthood never ended either. This is just a new and living way compared to the shadow of this.

Shalom,
g

 2010/8/10 15:22
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

by Phanetheus on 2010/8/10 17:22:21 writes:
"The gk checks with what you say however conclusion drawn regarding this verse is faulty. Verb tenses in this verse are quite a bit more important here than most are willing to take the time to consider, which has not been done inticated in what you state."

It seems clear to me that you are not willing to discuss these things rationally. I shall ignore all our postings from now on. I suggest that those who want to discuss this topic do the same.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2010/8/10 15:51Profile
philologos
Member



Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK

 Re:

as I was saying...

In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. Heb 8:13 NKJV

It is helpful to remember the time context of the epistle to the Hebrews. Most conservative Bible students would put the date of the book at around 65 AD. That is approximately 30 years after Pentecost but the hidden significance is that it is probably less than 5 years away from the end.

Youngs Literal Translation has...
"in the saying ‘new,’ He hath made the first old, and what doth become obsolete and is old [is] nigh disappearing." Heb 8:13 YNG

The NKJV uses the word 'obsolete' twice but Youngs makes the point that different words are being used. If you check out your Vines

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Search/Dictionary/viewTopic.cfm?type=getTopic&Topic=Old&DictID=9#Vines

you will see the different words that are used and their significance.

The writer says 'the old covenant' has become obsolete and that what is become old is near to vanishing away. He is speaking prophetically, within 5 years even the trappings of the Old Covenant would be gone, never to be restored. At the time of his writing he views the Old Covenant as 'past it' and about to vanish entirely.

The Old Covenant cannot function without the Levitical priestly system. In AD 70 that priesthood vanished never to be restored.


_________________
Ron Bailey

 2010/8/10 16:08Profile









 Re:

by philologos on 2010/8/10 11:51:49

by Phanetheus on 2010/8/10 17:22:21 writes:
"The gk checks with what you say however conclusion drawn regarding this verse is faulty. Verb tenses in this verse are quite a bit more important here than most are willing to take the time to consider, which has not been done inticated in what you state."

by philologos on 2010/8/10 11:51:49
It seems clear to me that you are not willing to discuss these things rationally.
============================================================
This accusation is groundless as the first small part of why what you are stating is invalid. How much more rational could it be than to spell out why what you claim is not the way it is.

Are you stating i'm not willing to discuss these things rationally because these little particulars claimed through reference to the blue bible because your responses are as solid as the things claimed to be in the scriptures just are not there?

Have you always failed to answer when wrong things are pointed out clearly like:

-talking about New Covenant, and by silence regarding issues concerning what Jesus Christ has done and still speaks, deny our very Mediator his place in of all of God's covenants of promise now made completely valid in Him.

-misappropriating verb tenses

-confusing the issues of subject and object in the manuscripts

-adding interpretations of things that are not in the Bible passages

- inappropriate analogies.

Can't you admit when dmit when things may just be a little screwy

i'm not going to tell anybody what to do except take all the scriptures in relation to Jesus Christ at face value, and quit adding to or taking away from them.

It's supposed it's just as well you don't answer any posts from here, as any rational debate with you turns out like trying to slice aethereal butter using a bladeless knife without a handle.

You will be responded to whether you care to look or not.

Suggest what you will as apparently you are the ultimate authority?

Any argument that demans or belittles what Jesus' finished work has done, encompasses, and made possible to usward who believe is not from God.

Where's those scriptures to make a solid foundation for what you state Ron?

Does saying, in not so few words, that Jesus has invalidated everything God's done prior to His crucifixion any way to draw anyone into a closer relationship with God?

Have at it, but don't expect God to be pleased with it.

This too shall pass.


Prayers for you daily, that you be filled with the abundant treasures of wisdom and knowledge found only in Jesus Christ bring you to understand the fullness of His Will, continue.

It's desired that you would be a bit more evaluative before expounding, even slower to anger, and listen to everything instead of feigning ignorance.

i'll continue to read everything, search the scriptures, learn from mistakes, and correct accordingly.

ALL scripture is God breathed and profitable...

You are more than what you are attempting to do and we have a God who finds satisfaction in our faith(fulness) towards His whole testAMENt...

...not just bits and pieces that are crammed together ignoring the picture encompassing them, namely, Jesus Christ.


It's all about Jesus, and not what we would like to think is written.

Yur favorite lil' kotz,
g

 2010/8/10 18:03
RobertW
Member



Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
Does saying, in not so few words, that Jesus has invalidated everything God's done prior to His crucifixion any way to draw anyone into a closer relationship with God?



This is the fundamental area of disagreement that makes all our conversation an exercise in futility. Jesus is the second person in the Godhead. Unless we can agree on that we can't possibly converse in any coherent way.


_________________
Robert Wurtz II

 2010/8/10 19:05Profile









 Re:

In a previous responding to the initiator of this thread, Ron, it was mentioned that Heb. 8.13 could possibly be considered prophetically.

This was not meant to infer the destruction of the temple although quite some time ago that is what was thought here.

It could possibly mean that, yet 2 things, one in the book of Hebrews itself caused reconsideration.


Why was this view changed?

Jesus prophecy of this was more than sufficently and clearly explained and repeated 3 times in the synoptic gospels.
(Who better to explain the word of God than the Word of God Himself, having declared the end since the beginning. He is the spirit of prophecy (Rev. 19.10).)

Most importantly, all through this epistle there is never a referral to the Temple, but only the tent, the tabernacle, and that tabernacle had not been used for about 1 millenium prior to this being written.

The whole concern of this book is not the Law itself, but the role of the preistly administration, (, the Old Covenant)within the context of the Everlasting Covenant.
This books instructions are to Messianic Believers is to completely draw attention attention away from the Temple and not towards it. If this were a prophecy about the Temple, it is a contradiction against what is emphasized everywhere else in this epistle.

Chapters 9 and 10 of Hebrews clarify that it is not the Old Covenant that is vanishing but the order of priestly administration. There is no change in the moral or civic requirements, only a variation, metathesis, in priesthood:
Everything of the old covenant remains intact with a change in administration, Jesus Himself being the immortal High Priest-King forever.




Love, Hope, and Faith,
gregg

...I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears. And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified.
Acts 20:31-32

 2010/8/10 19:11





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy