HEBREWS STILL NOT GETTING IT PART 3 – Absolutely NO POWERS Under The Old Covenant – Short Post!

EMPTY PREMISES

Image

The above derelict building is an appropriate and accurate representation of that same old covenant that most of you blinded Hebrews continue to return to in the hopes of attaining to righteousness in the eyes of the Most High. In the same way that the premises above has not been used in a very long time and has begun to decay, the same old covenant that most of you hold near and dear to your hearts is in exactly the same condition. Paul confirms the condition of the old covenant in Hebrews 8:13 which reads:

8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which DECAYETH and WAXETH OLD IS READY TO VANISH AWAY.

Now, I do not know what part of this verse that you misguided Hebrews cannot understand. The first covenant is old and is clearly described as decaying, waxing old and ready to disappear. Yet and still most of you Hebrews continue to keep your sabbaths, feast days, holy days and many other ordinances pertaining to this OLD and DECAYING covenant. Exactly how do you expect to make contact with the creator of the universe through an old and decaying mechanism? The other obvious question would be why would you still attempt to attain to righteousness through a covenant that not even your forefathers could keep, on top of this the Most High having provided you with an easier and newer way to grasp the reigns of righteousness through a new simple requirement of faith and belief?

How ridiculous and foolish would it be to attempt to forge and construct a new building and join it to the decadent and broken structure above? This is why Christ stated that old wine cannot be put into new bottles and a new piece of cloth cannot be put on an old garment. You cannot mix and match the covenants together even though most of you are still attempting to despite being informed otherwise out of the very mouth of the man who is the authority of the new covenant. Again, attempting to mix and match the old and new covenants together is simply a fool’s errand, IT CANNOT BE DONE.

Of course, the majority of you Hebrews are stiff necked and still believe that you can actually add to what Christ has already full completed though his sacrifice. Of course there are others of you who have now been moved to completely reject Christ altogether and you have been persuaded that you can reach and connect to the Father via your own steam and effort. Romans 1:22 reads:

1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

This is one of the main verses that springs to mind when I think of you old covenant Hebrews rambling and trundling on with your mission of vanity. Of course we are all familiar with John 14:6 where Christ categorically stated that NO MAN CAN COME TO THE FATHER BUT BY HIM. Those who did not believe in Christ from the beginning and those who have now chosen to turn their back on him will suffer greatly at the hands of that same Father whom you all claim to love.

A NEW BUILDING

ImageImageImage

The new covenant that has been forged through the death of Christ resembles the the buildings above, fresh and new. Compare these premises directly above here to the old derelict building at the top of the page, the other obvious difference here is that these new premises are OCCUPIED, people are using the buildings and therefore you as a customer can receive service. What the old covenant Hebrews continue to do is return to that derelict building, still expect to be served and when somebody walks by and attempts to tell them that the building is old, decaying and that they will not receive any service here because nobody is in occupancy of the building, they proceed to call the informer crazy and an agent of the institutional church beast when in fact all the information provider is doing is simply pointing out the obvious.

I have already been through some of the scriptures in relation to the new covenant in the other 2 parts to this series, the fact that we are under a new covenant is abundantly clear. What we simply have today are Hebrew “professors, bishops, deacons and elders” who have forged a reputation upon teaching the flocks error in order to control people and have them believe that these so called “leaders” having given them the truth as to who they are, are now essential requirements of their lives.

It is ironic how there is a whole letter dedicated to you very Hebrews consisting of 13 chapters clearly explaining all of the changes that have taken place under the death of Christ and further expounding on how this transition has taken place and most of you Hebrews still don’t get it. Yet and still you will stand there and attempt to teach me and others about the ancient Hebrew and Greek yet the English which is blatantly in your face first hand, to this day you still cannot grasp(English being your own language). I’ll leave you to marinade on that anomalous thought. Perhaps some of you who still believe in Christ may actually muster the courage and read through those 13 chapters in Hebrews that were specifically dedicated to you………..perhaps one day.

The Deprogramming And Decontamination Process Continues

Stay Individual

Most High Bless

10 thoughts on “HEBREWS STILL NOT GETTING IT PART 3 – Absolutely NO POWERS Under The Old Covenant – Short Post!

  1. Sir,

    New Covenant is still between the Most High and the Chosen People, genuine Hebrew Israelites through the Son “Christ” “Jesus” – common names – who is a Black man.
    As edomites and heathens we are not among the Elect and will have a subject status in the Kingdom.

    It seems to me that nearly all Hebrew Israelites today are professing that, only a tiny portion is rejecting the New Testament.

    white guy listening to Hebrew Israelites

    Like

    • Ohu,

      What you actually have is a large majority of Hebrews who pay the new testament and the new covenant lip service but who really pay more homage towards the old covenant except when it comes down to the forgiveness and the sacrifice for our sins, it is here where Christ is “conveniently” injected into the equation.

      Hebrews walking in faith and believe alone are few and far between, most are either still attempting to mix and match both covenants which I have explained before in previous posts cannot be done(Christ also confirmed this same position)or they are rejecting the new testament and the new covenant altogether. An example of the first is that the majority of Hebrews are still teaching that it is obligatory to keep the Sabbath when the Sabbath is clearly part of the old covenant which is now derelict and defunct.

      You have to remember that rejecting the new testament and the new covenant is also a case of teaching old covenant commandments as law which are no longer of validity ie, keeping the Sabbath, keeping the feast days, the holy days etc. Most Hebrews are still doing these things, rejection of the new covenant and the new testament is much deeper than you realise.

      Most High Bless

      Like

    • Just by seeing that you would try to convince others is with out the proper research that “Ahyah” means Most High?? It is “El Elyon” Most High GOD. Now you speak terribly against Hebrews?? Yeshua said ” The world will not pass away before one yot or tiddle will change from the Law. I have come to Fulfill the Law, not to abolish the Law. Blessed is he who follows the law, and he who teaches others to live by the law. The Law teaches us what GOD HATES. We ARE saved by GRACE, by the ability to Repent for our Sins, by the Blood and Resurrection of Yeshua. Go and Sin no more. Meaning Don’t Repeat that Sin. Ephesians teaches us to “Imitate Yeshua”
      And by the way you bash the Hebrews, GOD Calls them the “Apple of HIS Eye” so it is like poking HIM right in the eye. He also told Abraham regarding the Nation Israel, (By the way Abraham was the first in the Bible to be called The Hebrew)GOD promised him regarding the Nation coming from Isaac, I will Bless Those who bless You and Curse those who Curse You!! Looking at your teachings, you are EXACTLY what Yeshua and the other Disciples warned us about!! You are a FALSE TEACHER and LEADING OTHERS AWAY FROM GOD!!!

      Like

      • sir, I don’t know exactly who you are responding … if it is to my comment, you are highly mislead. I’m not teaching anything. As an edomite, I merely listen to what Hebrew Israelites are teaching.

        Like

      • One Way,

        Join the queue with the multitude of other folks who believe that they have found the name of the Most High. There are people with even more zeal than yourself who will testify that the name that they have is the name that everybody has been searching for. Look, face the facts, the real name has been lost though it is soon to be revealed once more again. My suggestion to you is to have patience and wait for revelation rather than running ahead of yourself. This is how mistakes are commonly made. I have personally left the subject of the name because I have seen that it has become a distraction, therefore I use neutral terms to refer to the Father and Christ. This is my own personal choice and as I have stated before, nobody else is obligated to take this route just because I have.

        Let us quote Matthew 5:17-18 in its entirety and not the doctored edited version that you have posted. Matthew 5:17-18 reads:

        5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

        5:18 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.

        So in verse 17 Christ states that he has come to fulfill the law and in verse 18 he states that nothing shall pass from the law till all be fulfilled. So if Christ came to fulfill the law then he must have completed his mission of fulfilling the law before he departed for heaven, this is common sense. John 19:30 reads:

        19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, IT ITS FINISHED: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

        There is your completion of fulfilling the law right there. It is finished means just that, IT IS FINISHED, and because it is finished, jots and tittles can now indeed pass from the law. This is the problem with many Hebrews, you want to continue to live in past. The sacrificial/ordinance/atonement side of the law is dead and has been replaced by a new law of faith and no longer works. Romans 3:27-28 reads:

        3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the LAW OF FAITH.

        3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith WITHOUT THE DEEDS OF THE LAW.

        Romans 3:20 reads:

        3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall NO FLESH be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

        You are not rolling into the kingdom under your own steam so you might aswell quit while you are ahead and accept that salvation is a GIFT from the Most High that cannot be earned or worked off in payment(Ephesians 2:8-9). Christ stated that he burden is LIGHT and his yoke is EASY. Your forefathers couldn’t even keep the law under their own system and you believe that you can fair better than them living under the powers of others? Get real please, you are not a super hero.

        I am a Hebrew and I am speaking on the error of my people according to this day just as Paul did the same for the Hebrews in his time. Error is error and it must be accepted, not reasoned around and brushed under the carpet. We are under a new covenant and Christ is the mediator of that NEW covenant(Hebrews 8:6,13), why is this so hard for Hebrews to accept without a fight?

        I have more than proven that we are under a new covenant. If you still stand with the accusation that I am a false teacher then prove here that we are still under the old covenant and that we are still obligated to keep the old covenant laws. I await your response.

        Like

  2. Hello there, I came across your site a few days ago. I read part one and two of this post so I wanted to address some things I feel may have not been covered (if I’m repeating things that have been said already, I apologize in advance but maybe you can kindly rephrase your reasoning for me).

    “The above derelict building is an appropriate and accurate representation of that same old covenant that most of you blinded Hebrews continue to return to in the hopes of attaining to righteousness in the eyes of the Most High.”
    One thing you mentioned previously is that most Hebrew Israelites are mixing the new and old covenants. Yet you yourself said that part of the law is done away with and part of it is not. You hold the very same “new wine in old wineskins” belief that you’re hammering people on by telling people that a part of the “old” covenant has carried over into the new. However, I have yet to find a place in scripture where God specifically separates Ordinance/Sacrificial/Atonement part of the law and Moral part of law; those are man-made separations for the sake of categorization. The law = divine instructions. God’s instructions are still valid, seeing as though He didn’t go back on His standard or change. I have yet to find a place in scripture where God tells a prophet that the law would be separated or abolished (Amos 3:7). What I do see is God saying he won’t forget the “old” covenant (Deut 4:31). Scripture says the “old” covenant is an everlasting one (Gen 17:7). I see that he calls all of his instructions in both Deut 4 and Lev 18 (things you might say are ceremonial and moral) statues, judgments, ordinances, etc; there is no differentiation in His law. Also, very many Hebrew Israelites like me do not seek to obtain righteousness through the law. That is silly. We return to the way of God out of love, faith and a personal desire to be obedient (Ezekiel 36:25-28).

    He was speaking to YOUR ancestors, Hebrew Israelite. Did God forget his people? Did God go back on his covenant? Did God marry another nation? Did God change his standard? Last time I checked, people in a nation were subject to the ordinance of that nation. And if you’re claiming that nation…you’re subject to its rules. God said he would bring us out of captivity. Going back to His way is FREEDOM…we’re currently living in captivity. You saying you don’t want to follow his way is you saying you’re content in Babylon. You’re content with taking on the customs of the people around you (Christians = #1 religion in the world). You have no desire to prepare your heart (which is supposed to be softened and have the law written on it) and mind (which is supposed to be renewed) for the new Jerusalem. You are not going to just waltz through the holy gates when God knows you have no intent to be obedient outside the gates. Yes, our fathers couldn’t do it; they didn’t have the spirit. Child, and not only that…they were adding to scriptures because they didn’t trust that God would seal them and keep them from sinning (transgressing the law). But God is about to seal 144,000 of his people who WILL walk in SPIRIT AND TRUTH. You don’t walk in spirit and truth the way Jesus did without keeping his commandments bro. You don’t become a manifested son of God without humbling yourself and walking out the will of God. The law is spiritual; the flesh is carnal. Saying “I can’t do this” or “this is too hard” is you forsaking the sacrifice of Christ because now it’s not even about us. We’re supposed to dead, right? We live through Christ and through Him we can do all things. You say the only thing we basically have to do now is love and believe. Ok, the demons believe so clearly that’s basic. Love is contorted in the world so the only way to determine what love is is to find who love is: God. And God told us how to love him…obey HIS commandments. Moses didn’t have a law. Moses didn’t have a people. God has a law and used Moses to give his law to his people. That’s what we obey out of love and faith.
    I haven’t seen an outline of an entirely brand new covenant. Everyone always tries to piece together this verse with that verse and make it fit together and throw some hot sauce on it and call it new. But it’s just not there. I mean…we are new, cleansed temples of God. So why defile ourselves with lawlessness? Hebrews shows how Christ is the high priest and that he, our perfect lamb, was sacrificed for everyone. It’s a one-time deal.
    In John 19:30, Christ doesn’t say the law is finished. He himself said I did not come to abolish the law.
    You also mentioned before that Matt 24 was pointing to 70AD I believe. However, earlier in the chapter, the disciples are asking about the end of the world, about when Christ would return (Matt 24:3). Verse 20 just demonstrates that Christ expects us to still be keeping the Sabbath obediently, not recreationally.
    Also, you keep pointing out Matthew 5:18. It says UNTIL heaven and earth pass away… So before you even get to the last part of the sentence, you know that something is contingent upon the passing away of heaven and earth. Well, what’s contingent? “…one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law…” the doing away of the law as a result of it being fulfilled entirely. As long as this heaven and this earth is still here, the law is still here.
    And why would God still use “lawless” to describe sinful people if there was no law? And if there was no law…then what is sin? Law = instructions. And if there were no instructions, there would be no standard to live by. It just doesn’t make sense for God to do that. How could we stand out and be a light if we were lawless like everyone else?
    This is lengthy already and I haven’t asked all the questions I wanted to ask lol. Smh. But I’ll just wait for now. I look forward to hearing from you, bro. Feel free to email me too if you like.

    Like

    • Kels,

      When I receive an response like this where I am being quoted, my normal first port of call is to go back and read over what has been quoted from. I have stated that Hebrews are “ATTEMPTING” to mix and match the old and new covenants however,they have not been successful in doing so. Christ and Paul both eluded to the futility of attempting to mix the old covenant with the new covenant. So Hebrews are “trying” to pick and mix, however it is not working and never will work.

      There is absolutely no place in any of my posts where I have stated that part of the old covenant has past on to the new, you are going to have to show me that particular quote.

      The separation of the law in two is obvious, there are laws that dealt with how you were to interact with the Most High and other laws dealing with how you were to interact with mankind. You cannot steal from the Most High, you cannot kill the Most High, you cannot bear false witness against the Most High, it is obvious that these laws pertain to man. In the case of drink offerings, sin offering, meat offering etc, these laws were they that dealt with interacting with the Most High. The separation doesn’t have to be spelled out word for word or be written in black and white to be seen, common sense that the Most High gave us should kick in at this point which transcends categorising and classification. Discernment via the Spirit also helps bring forth revelations such as this.

      Allow me to quote you now and show you in error. You stated the following:

      “I have yet to find a place in scripture where God tells a prophet that the law would be separated or abolished”.

      Jeremiah 31:31-33 reads:

      31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a NEW COVENANT with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

      31:32 NOT ACCORDING TO THE COVENANT THAT I MADE WITH THEIR FATHERS in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

      31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

      You cannot get more obvious than this, as I have stated before in numerous other posts aswell as in other comments, a new covenant, NOT LIKE THE OLD and a law now written in the hearts of the Hebrews instead of on paper and stone. Sounds to me like this is a change. I notice that the majority of Hebrews steer clear of these particular verses in Jeremiah as they throw a huge wrench in the “return to the old covenant doctrine”. This is the Most High instructing a prophet that a change is soon to take place. You were saying……………………………………………………….

      Not forgetting the covenant of the fathers does not automatically rule out a change in the future in order to fortify and keep the promise. You have just read the above in the book of Jeremiah for yourself that clarifies this.

      There are obvious differentiations, the issue here is that you want the scriptures to spell it out for you in black and white rather than allowing the Spirit to give you understanding. I have already illustrated the obvious differences between each side of the laws above. If I steal from another man, the Most High is not affected by my actions. Putting things across in a fashion that people can more readily grasp is not a sin.

      At the end of the day you cannot categorically state that the Most High does not bring about change as then if this is the case then I would have to ask you why you are no longer sacrificing animals for sins or offering up meat offerings and drink offerings to the Most High. The change in the sacrifice standard alone indicates a change has taken place. Christ has paid the price for our sins whereas before animals were sacrificed for sins and this was only sufficient to cover them, not wash them away. You are running up a muddy path here with no traction at this point.

      I take on the customs of my records, since my records clearly indicate that we are under a new covenant(Hebrews 8), why would I ignore this declaration? I have stated this before, most Hebrews are determining what is right to perform from what is wrong not based upon what the scriptures say but based against the teachings of the institutional church infrastructure. The Roman Catholic church includes the Apocrypha in its bible, what, should we throw the Apocrypha out then just because they include it and teach from it aswell? This type of path can become extremely ridiculous very quickly. The institutional church teaches that Christ performed miracles, died and rose again, should we throw out these accounts aswell because they are teaching them also?

      I simply read what is written and understand it in its plain context regardless of who attaches a teaching or a doctrine to a particular section or verse. Hebrews 12:24 states that Christ is the mediator of the NEW COVENANT. This is plain English for all to understand, nobody has a monopoly on what can be plainly understood.

      Christ stated to keep HIS commandments which are scattered throughout Matthew 5,6 and 7. Christ in no wise instructed us to return to the old covenant. The commandments we are to keep are those we have received under the new covenant. The same mistakes that Paul told the Romans that the Hebrews were making in his day are the very same mistakes that most Hebrews today are making, and most will read these verses(Romans 9:30-32) and it still will not register with them that they are going down the same road of error that their forefathers ventured down.

      You talk about doing all things through Christ yet Christ made abundantly clear that you cannot mix new and old things together. Now, if you do not believe that this parable was referring to the non mixing of the old and new covenants then please explain to me what this particular parable was referring to.

      “I haven’t seen an outline of an entirely brand new covenant”.

      Jeremiah 31:31 as a forewarning, Hebrews 8:6,7,8,9,10,13,12:24. The problem here is that you do not want to accept what is written under a plain understanding and you would rather uphold the teachings and traditions of so called Hebrew “elders” and “teachers” believing that somehow their teachings and their doctrine cannot be in error. There is no juggling necessary here, the understanding is obvious and can only be interpreted correctly in one direction.

      John 19:30 refers to the completion of Christ’s fulfillment of the law according to his reason for being on earth written in Matthew 5:17. Ok, then explain to me the meaning of John 19:30 since you disagree with my conclusion on it.

      The law is still here is it? Ok, then since you decide to put yourself under the law then you are bound by it, not me. However Galations 5:4 reads:

      5:4 Christ is become of NO EFFECT unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are FALLEN FROM GRACE.

      Galations 2:16 reads:

      2:16 Knowing that a man is NOT JUSTIFIED BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: FOR BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW SHALL NO FLESH BE JUSTIFIED.

      Romans 3:20 reads:

      3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall NO FLESH be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

      Romans 3:27-28 reads:

      3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by THE LAW OF FAITH.

      3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is JUSTIFIED BY FAITH WITHOUT THE DEEDS OF THE LAW.

      Galations 5:18 reads:

      5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, YE ARE NOT UNDER THE LAW.

      The majority of Hebrews read all of the above verses yet the cogs still do not turn and most of you still do not get it. I mean, you couldn’t obtain a plainer understanding. How plainer than this do you want?

      In closing, your instructions as you put it are to walk by faith and belief. I humbly recommend that you read all of the above scriptures and reevaluate your position. I also strongly suggest that you not be afraid to go against the grain of error being taught by so called “elders” and such like in spite of many of them having a reputation. Error is error and it must be corrected regardless of how renown the status of the person teaching is.

      Most High Bless

      Like

  3. Ok, let’s start over. Hi. Firstly, I am not the spokeswoman for the Hebrew Israelites. I haven’t completely disregarded “the teachings of the institutional church”. I haven’t entirely accepted the beliefs of every single Hebrew Israelite. I do not know everything; I’m aware that I do not know everything. I do not pretend to act as though I know everything. I am a single person with my own set of beliefs seeking truth just like everyone else. I am upset with the divisions amongst the body of Christ, just like you are. I just hope you hear me out.

    Secondly, the core of my first response was mainly about whether or not the LAW has been done away with. I guess where we were missing each other is the fact that I don’t think the law being done away with is a part of the new covenant nor do I think the law and the covenant (old or new) are one and the same. So when I ask about the law being done away and you point to “new covenant” scriptures…that doesn’t line up because I made no mention of a covenant. I asked about the law. Again, the law and covenant are two different things. Yes, the law is a part of the covenant, but the two are different. You’re using them synonymously and that’s super confusing. For example…I need auto insurance. After being with Nationwide for three years, I switch to Geico. Does me changing my insurance provider change the fact that I still need insurance? No. Is the fact that I need insurance synonymous with my insurance provider? No. Law = my need for insurance (don’t read too much into the need part) & Insurance provider = covenant. When contracts change, terms will change in regards to how my need for insurance is met, but the fact that I still need insurance isn’t going anywhere…just like the law is still in place. There’s even a distinction between the concept of law and covenant in scripture (Deut 7:12-14). The covenant is a conditional promise and covering (Deut 30); obedience and love is key in both covenants (Deut 6:5; Ecc 12:13; Matt 22:37).

    I hope you get a feel for where I’m coming from, but please feel free to give me your understanding/definition of law, covenant, new covenant, and old covenant. Now…I DO acknowledge that something that changed with the new and old covenant. The old covenant was made with Abraham. It talked about blessings, the promised land, redemption, a nation of people coming into existence, circumcision (Gen 15, Gen 17). Abraham had faith in God and loved him; God made an agreement with him. God told him to be perfect before the covenant was explained (Gen 17:1); we know love is perfected when we keep his word (1 John 2:3-6). Israel also made the SAME covenant with the Lord (Genesis 17:7-9; Gen. 26-28 Exodus 19:5-8).

    If you’re saying the old covenant = law in place & new covenant = law being done away with (which may be my misinterpretation…I honestly don’t know what you think the new covenant is), then this quote would be you mixing the covenants, in my opinion:

    “From this point onwards, the side of the law that I am referring to in question is the Ordinance/Sacrificial/Atonement part of the law(the side which deals with how we as a people were supposed to interact with Most High). The moral side of the law(which deals with how we are to interact and live in harmony and at peace with our fellow man) will always remain as long as people are alive and walking the earth. The moral side of the law was not put away, it was the ordinance/sacrificial/atonement side of the law that was replaced by the Law Of Faith through Christ’s death and blood.” Part One of This Post

    I say it appears as though you are mixing the covenants because you’re hanging on to the “moral side” of the law. I do agree that certain parts of the law deal with certain parts of life and interactions with God and people, most definitely. But like I said before, the law is the law. God didn’t make four or five sets of laws; he made one. So it’s either in place or entirely done away with. You saying it’s partially done away with is an attempt to mix both covenants if you believe the law is completely done away with.

    Jeremiah 31 shows how the law will not just written on stone, but written on the hearts of the people. In order for the law to be written on their hearts…it would still have to be in place. Therefore it has not been separated or abolished. Once again, you’re using the concept of law and covenant synonymously here again.

    Not forgetting the covenant of the fathers does not automatically rule out a change in the future; I agree. But it does mean that certain aspects won’t change because it is remembered: the law and its existence. If God can remember sins no more (Hebrews 8:12), why wouldn’t he just throw out the law? He doesn’t because it’s the standard. However, he throws out the old covenant (Hebrews 8:13).

    Honestly, you haven’t really illustrated the differences in the new and old covenant in your posts. And there are some black and white differences between the two. I agree, wow Christ, not Moses, is the mediator between us and the Father. Now Gentiles are allowed into the new covenant. Now the law isn’t on stone, but on our hearts. Now we can be led by the spirit. It’s really not about detail of the letter; it’s about the spirit. When you’re in the spirit, you’ll be walking out the heart of the law in faith. The result of faith is obedience to God. You see this with Noah, Moses, Abraham, Christ…and the whole faith hall of fame in Hebrews 11.

    When I mentioned “I haven’t seen an outline of an entirely brand new covenant” I meant a covenant that did not include the law. In other words, I was using your definition of new covenant.

    John 19:30 refers to the completion of Christ’s fulfillment of the law? No. You’re reaching. “It” could mean anything: his ministry of three years, him becoming sin, him facing the wrath of God for becoming sin, sin’s power over us…anything.

    You keep referring to Paul referring to people trying to obtain righteousness and justification ONLY by works of the law. I’m not trying to be justified by works of the law nor am I trying to obtain righteousness by the law in that way. I’m following my Father’s commandments out of love. It is possible to be obedient without wanting something in return. It is possible for people to voluntarily follow Christ and his instructions out of faith and love for him. There’s nothing to boast about here. Paul was a Hebrew Israelite and kept the law (2 Corinthians 11:22; Acts 18:21; Acts 25:7-8, Romans 7:25). Paul also said these this in Romans 3:31: Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

    James said you were able to see what he believed by what he did (James 2:17-26):
    17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
    18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
    22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
    24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
    26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

    And what you do reflects what you believe. But what’s your mark of faith? How will I know what you believe by what you do? How will another “believer” be able to spot you out if your basis of faith is all inside your head and wrapped in personal belief, thought and activities? Would you be married to a woman that did whatever she wanted (because if the law is done away with…there’s no standard whatsoever)? No…you wouldn’t. Why would Christ be married to a church that didn’t submit to him?

    You suggested that I go against the grain of error but error is in lawlessness, which is what most teach. My “elders” teach lawlessness. So most definitely, I’ll go against that.

    I really hope you go through every single chapter of scripture I listed. I really hope you reconsider. I really hope you don’t simply gloss over what doesn’t sit right with you. I hope you see the bigger picture and not just one verse or one commandment at a time. His thoughts and ways are higher than our thoughts and ways.
    Thanks for the blessings. Back at you bro!

    Like

    • Kels,

      Right, what I will attempt to do now is break this down even further in order for the understanding to be clear. Also, you need to be forthcoming and honest about your objectives, as on the one hand you say that you are seeking answers and need clarification on certain issues yet on the other hand you point to supposed “errors” and “contradictions” in what I am saying when lined up against the scriptures. These actions seem a little slick and deceptive to me. Do you require some answers or do already have the answers?

      Let me clarify the position of ONE. There are many, many examples in life today of things which are one yet the one is made up of many components. 1 egg consists of 4 components, shell, membrane, white and yoke. 1 car consists and is made up of 1000s of parts, 1 tree has many branches, 1 hand is made up of 4 fingers and 1 thumb, 1 foot is made up of 5 toes, a sole and a heel. This same principle applies to the law, 1 law that is constructed on 2 parts. Yes the law overall is 1 however you are making the mistake of thinking that the composition numbers that make up the law are the same, this is where you are in error. One house is built with many bricks. The number of determination is not based upon the individual components but is based upon the final product.

      In terms of the covenant, the covenants both old and new we can compare to contracts and the law within those covenants we can compare to terms and conditions. The terms and conditions under the new covenant have changed, we are no longer required to perform the tasks of the old covenant under the new, that is the tasks relating directly towards the Most High. Christ’s sacrifice has enabled these tasks to be substituted for simply having faith and belief in him These are our new terms and conditions with the Most High under the new contract, have faith and belief in him through his son Christ. It stands to reason that a new contract in place would logically bring forth new terms. So, we have a new contract with the Most High and the terms and conditions in relation to how we connect and interact with HIM have changed. One law made up of two components and one of those components has been replaced and upgraded. The moral side of the law is eternal, does not contain a time stamp nor is affected by time, it is timeless. The moral side of the law does not have an expiry and thus cannot be labelled as “old” even though it ran alongside the “old covenant”.

      So, no, there is no mixing of old and new covenants by myself, it is your understanding of what is old from what transcends time that requires correction.

      Christ already made it clear in Matthew 5:17 that he came to fulfill the law and all the things that you conveniently mentioned separately were all part of the fulfillment of that particular component of the law. Stop this sneaky jab business, you have already acknowledged that YOU are not sure what “it is finished” exactly pertains to, therefore you cannot categorically tell me that I am “reaching”. If you are genuinely trying to learn something then it would benefit you to cut out the sneaky covert attacks. Stop the truffle shuffling.

      What commandments are you trying to keep? If you are trying to keep the Sabbath then this is part of the works of the law under the old covenant. The same applies if you are trying to keep the feast days, holy days etc. Those terms and conditions are old and that covenant is decaying. James was not referring to carrying out the works of the law as a sign of your faith, he never saids “works of the law”, he simply said works. Those “works” are whatever the Most High leads you to do for his kingdom. Part of my work is writing posts for this site, encouraging the Hebrews, bringing truth to my people and bringing new knowledge to not only Hebrews but also to the Gentiles in relation to different aspects of life. This is my sign of faith in the Most High and this is the type of work that the Most High is looking for. Finding a need and filling it is the long and short of showing your faith towards the Most High Power today under the new covenant. This is how you are spotted by other believers, not that this is a priority or should be one. This business about needing to show other believers that you are “down with the Lord” is simply more institutional church gimmickry. Showing yourself approved unto the Most High is of more importance than attempting to beat your chest in front of other people.

      Remember that Paul presented the gospel that had been presented to him by Christ directly, to James, Cephas and John and they added nothing to it(Galations 2) ie it didn’t need to be corrected. Yes, Paul stated that keeping the works of the law was a waste of time and profited the individual doing them nothing under Christ and the new covenant. Paul stated that the law is established via FAITH, not via works of it. You missed the entire concept that was being expounded upon in that verse. Yet and still that verse is still not instructing you to keep the law.

      In closing I recommend that you indeed begin to look at things from a different perspective and abandon the box thinking. Christ instructed us to keep HIS commandments, his commandments are located in the gospels, they are not in Deuteronomy, Genesis, Leviticus or any other old testament books. You cannot state that you have faith in the Most High and then go back to an old covenant of works, the two are diametrically opposed to each other. The scriptures are abundantly clear that we are presently under a new covenant. Whether you choose to accept this or not is your business, as for me I will walk according to it.

      Most High Bless

      Like

  4. Whew…I’ll have to agree to disagree with most of that. Ultimately, I don’t know your heart. I just hope what’s in it is acceptable in the end.

    Best regards.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s