_________________
Ron Halverson

did not know about the intro.Got it done

God Bless

_________________
Earl

Greetings, Preacher and Strider...

Consider this passage.

"If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

"For the priesthood being changed, [b]there is made of necessity a change also of the law.[/b]" (Heb. 7.12).

This is so clear is it not? There has been a change in the priesthood. The people of God are no longer under the Levitical priesthood.

And so, necessarily, there is made "a change also of the law."

And he doesn't leave us in the dark as to what this change of the law consists of.

The Levitical priesthood had a law to administer.

The Melchizedek priesthood also has a law to administer.

And, as we read, our Lord Jesus Christ is our great High Priest "after the order of Melchizedek."

"For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof" (Heb. 7.18).

That law, the Torah, failed. Not that the law itself was intrinsically wrong, or unholy, or not good, but "it was "weak through the flesh" (Rom. 8.3).

It made of the people of God a bunch of failures.

Not so the New Law.

"But now hath He obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the mediator of a [b]better[/b] covenant, which was established upon [b]better[/b] promises (Heb. 8.6).

This New Law that our Great High Priest ministers from His Heavenly Throne is a far higher and far more powerful Law than the Torah of Moses.

"For the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus (not the Torah of Moses) hath made me FREE from the law of sin and death."

"But whoso looketh into the PERFECT LAW OF LIBERTY (not the Torah of Moses) and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his doing" (Jas. 1.25).

AD

_________________
Allan Halton

Hi again everyone.


Strider,


You said


"Strider: Chris, you forgot the next verse. Verse 4 says :
"Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you attempt to be justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."

This reinforces what i said. This passage is for those who are trusting in works (especially extra rabbinical laws) for justification. However, it in no way 'abolishes' the word of God.'"



What then, what reason is there for teaching men to be circumsied? to make them [b]unjust[/b]? [b]disobedient[/b]? [b]unrighteous[/b]?


For fun?


If you or someone else teaches that [b]God[/b] [u]commands[/u] men to be circumcised, what effect does that have upon their conscience if they refuse it?


Are they then lawless if they do?


Here is the entry from Vincet's Word Studies on this passage


Gal 5:4 -
Christ is become of no effect unto you (κατηργήθητε ἀπὸ Χριστοῦ)
Incorrect. Lit. ye were brought to nought from Christ. Comp. Rom_7:2, Rom_7:6. Your union with Christ is dissolved. The statement is compressed and requires to be filled out. “Ye were brought to nought and so separated from Christ.” For similar instances see Rom_9:3; Rom_11:3. The ἀπὸ from properly belongs to the supplied verb of separation. For the verb καταργεῖν see on Rom_3:3.


Ye are fallen from grace (τῆς χἁριτος ἐξεπέσατε)
For a similar phrase see 2Pe_3:17. Having put yourselves under the economy of salvation by law, you have fallen out of the economy of salvation by the grace of Christ. Paul's declarations are aimed at the Judaisers, who taught that the Christian economy was to be joined with the legal. His point is that the two are mutually exclusive. Comp. Rom_4:4, Rom_4:5, Rom_4:14, Rom_4:16.


The verb ἐκπίπτειν to fall out, in the literal sense, Act_12:7; Jam_1:11. In Class. of seamen thrown ashore, banishment, deprivation of an office, degeneration, of actors being hissed off the stage.






[b][color=000000]Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? [/color][/b]


- Galatians 3:3(KJV)



Again, what reason is there to teach men to be circumcised?


To make them perfect?




[b][color=000000]For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. [/color][/b]

- Galatians 5:6(KJV)



To avail nothing?



[b][color=000000]And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? then is the offense of the cross ceased. [/color][/b]


- Galatians 5:11(KJV)


What reason then is there to preach circumcision?

To avoid persecution?

To make the offense of the cross to cease?




Also...



"However, it in no way 'abolishes' the word of God."


We are not talking about abolishing the word of God but about commandments from the law of Moses.

Equivocation like this seems [b]deceptive[/b] to me.



EDIT: "We are not talking about abolishing the word of God but about commandments from the law of Moses."


I think I should have phrased this this way,


"We are not talking about abolishing the word of God. We are talking about commandments from the law of Moses."

_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

Strider,


You said

"Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? - Acts 15:10(KJV)



Strider: Chris, clearly Paul is here talking about the rabbinical laws (extra to the Torah) that the pharisees burdened the people with. Surely, you are not saying that the word of God is 'bondage'. this makes no sense at all."




Peter is responding to this


[b][color=000000] But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. [/color][/b]

- Acts 15:5(KJV)



Where do you read "rabbinical laws (extra to the Torah)" I don't see it? It says 'the law of Moses'?


And again, no one is talking about 'the word of God" but specificaly, the word of God by which He made a covenant with the Children of Israel


[b][color=000000]And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled [i]it[/i] on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words. [/color][/b]

- Exodus 24:7-8(KJV)



About bondage,


Paul writes,





[b][color=000000] For this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. [/color][/b]


- Galatians 4:25(KJV)

_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

Strider,


You said,





"...If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
- Galatians 2:14(KJV)

Here again, Paul is chastising Peter for being double minded. However, Paul is referring to Peter not following 'rabbinical' practices, which were extra to the Torah."







"If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles..."

_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

Strider,


You said,


"Strider: I do not recommend breaking up the Covenant into parts. That Covenant was renewed (not broken up or abolished) with the coming of Yeshua the Messiah"


Where do you read that the covenant which God gave to Moses was renewed?



According to Strong's the word translated 'new' in Jeremiah 31:31 is



H2319
חדשׁ
châdâsh
khaw-dawsh'
From H2318; new: - fresh, new thing.



And the word translated 'new' in Matthew 26:28 is


G2537
καινός
kainos
kahee-nos'
Of uncertain affinity; new (especially in freshness; while G3501 is properly so with respect to age): - new.



In Isaiah it says,


"As for me, this [i]is[/i] my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that [i]is[/i] upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and forever."


Whose words? Moses' or Christs'?


Whose seed? The children of Israel? Or these...



[b][color=000000] Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me [i]are[/i] for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion. [/color][/b]


- Isaiah 8:18(KJV)


[b][color=660000]I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. [/color][/b]

- John 17:6(KJV)



You said you do not "I do not recommend breaking up the Covenant into parts."


There was a law forbiding adultery [b]and one for it's punishment[/b]. And there are the curses written in the law(See Deuteronomy 28:15-68).

_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

Strider,


You said,


"By His ways, do you mean the commandments which He gave to the Apostles(See Matthew 28:18-20, John 17:8, Acts 1:2)
Strider: The commandments which He gave the apostles are no different than those found in the Tanakh (Hebrew scriptures) .. In fact any time the 'Scripture' is mentioned in the N.T ... it is referring to the Tanakh (misrepresented as the Old Testament)"




In Matthew chapter 5 the Lord Jesus qoutes some of the laws of Moses saying first,






[b][color=660000]Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time,[/color][/b]



and then saying


[b][color=660000]But I say unto you[/color][/b]

_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow

[i]I appologise if the mulitple posts are bothering anyone. It seems helpfull to me to seperate the issues[/i]


Strider,


You said,


"But Whose words are we commanded to hear now?

Strider: The words of Messiah echo those of His Father. There should be no confusion here."



The Lord Jesus Christ said


[b][color=660000] Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. [/color][/b]


Not an echo, but the very words of God.

_________________
Christopher Joel Dandrow