Jump to content

The Christian Protestant Community Forums

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community forums. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Community Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
Benji

Is the Old Testament Obsolete?

Recommended Posts

One must be VERY careful mixing OT theology with NT theology. The NT says that God has made the OT obsolete.  Heb 8:13 "When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear."  And what is this "new covenant?"  Grace!  Grace replaces the law! In Romans 6:14 Paul tells us "For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace." When did this happen?  When you received Christ as Lord and Savior.  The lost are still under the law (this is the "will soon disappear" in the above quote) but the born again Christian has died to sin and the law and is now under grace.  Did the law ever love you?  Did the law ever give you any grace?  Did the law ever die for you? The law is a taskmaster. It stands over you with a Cat 'O Nine Tails waiting for you to sin and when you do it flails you a good one with guilt and condemnation.  Grace on the other hand offers you forgiveness, love, mercy and pity. 

 

I'll take grace, thank you very much!  Leave the law and its guilt and condemnation to those who think they can wing it on their own on Judgment Day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, Benji said:

The NT says that God has made the OT obsolete.

Hope you don't mind me chiming in brother?

 

Nowhere is it stated that God made the OT obsolete but contrary to your statement Benji 2 Timothy 3:16-17 the whole of Scripture contains a perfect rule which leads to happy life. It's not my argument to go against what you're stating about Law vs. Grace, but rather that the OT and NT cannot or should not be divided into Law and Grace. Though I think we both agree on the point that Legalism (works-righteousness or justification by works) makes a mess of the Law while Grace untangles the mess which we become bound up in.

 

1 hour ago, Benji said:

Heb 8:13 "When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear."  And what is this "new covenant?"  Grace!  Grace replaces the law! In Romans 6:14 Paul tells us "For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace." When did this happen?  When you received Christ as Lord and Savior.  The lost are still under the law (this is the "will soon disappear" in the above quote) but the born again Christian has died to sin and the law and is now under grace.  Did the law ever love you?  Did the law ever give you any grace?  Did the law ever die for you? The law is a taskmaster. It stands over you with a Cat 'O Nine Tails waiting for you to sin and when you do it flails you a good one with guilt and condemnation.  Grace on the other hand offers you forgiveness, love, mercy and pity. 

 

I'll take grace, thank you very much!  Leave the law and its guilt and condemnation to those who think they can wing it on their own on Judgment Day.

The OT contains both Law and Grace as does the NT. Both OT and NT contain Law and Grace.

 

"The Law drives us to the Gospel that we are justified, then sends us to the Law again to show us our duty now that we are justified." - Thomas Boston

 

From a Covenant fulfillment perspective there are several OT Covenants leading throughout time to the NT Covenant.

 

Covenant doesn't necessarily equal salvation. The OT and NT contain various Covenants however the Ordo Salutis has always been the same.

 

Likewise, there is Gospel in the OT, the OT Saints in faith believed through the types and shadows of the Gospel message.

 

  • Like 1
  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Heb 8:13 "When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear."  The Old Covenant demanded a covenant of works, the New Covenant fulfills the covenant of works through the completed work of Jesus. The Old Covenant was designed to prepare the way for the New Covenant and then pass away as a principle of God’s dealing with men. The New Covenant was designed to last forever. The Old Covenant made nothing perfect, whereas the New Covenant can and will bring in the perfection of God’s people. The Old Covenant was confined to the descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob according to the flesh, the New Covenant is extended to all nations and races under heaven.

 

Christians are living under the New Covenant.  If one takes 2 Timothy 3:17-18 to mean that we all must follow the OT then I guess we had better get some lambs, bulls, turtledoves and goats for sacrifices for our sins and line up some Jewish priests because we now have 613 OT laws that we must follow perfectly!  As for me  I will leave the OT to the Jews and I will follow the New Covenant of grace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
6 hours ago, Benji said:

"Heb 8:13 "When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear."  The Old Covenant demanded a covenant of works, the New Covenant fulfills the covenant of works through the completed work of Jesus. The Old Covenant was designed to prepare the way for the New Covenant and then pass away as a principle of God’s dealing with men. The New Covenant was designed to last forever. The Old Covenant made nothing perfect, whereas the New Covenant can and will bring in the perfection of God’s people. The Old Covenant was confined to the descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob according to the flesh, the New Covenant is extended to all nations and races under heaven.

Again, you're equating the OT as strictly Old Covenant in Hebrews 8:13. While the Sinai Covenant is a covenant of works the New Covenant is a covenant of grace, precisely because Jesus Christ has fulfilled the covenant of works for us, we can inherit all of the everlasting promises in a covenant of grace.

6 hours ago, Benji said:

If one takes 2 Timothy 3:17-18 to mean that we all must follow the OT then I guess we had better get some lambs, bulls, turtledoves and goats for sacrifices for our sins and line up some Jewish priests because we now have 613 OT laws that we must follow perfectly! 

The OT provides a "shadow of things to come" in which we may understand depravity and necessary forgiveness, justification, and sanctification on the basis of Jesus' Law keeping.

6 hours ago, Benji said:

As for me  I will leave the OT to the Jews and I will follow the New Covenant of grace. 

After you wrote what you had referring to the OT? Without the OT the question of why Jesus Christ is difficult if not impossible to answer. Not even the Apostles made the OT obsolete by referring to the Law, the Prophets, and the book of Psalms.

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Deuteronomy 4:13 the covenant and the Ten Commandments are said to be one and the same! “So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone."  In Psalm 78:10 again they are said to be one and the same. "They did not keep the covenant of God; They refused to walk in His law."  Jeremiah 31:33 says the same thing. "But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people."  Romans 10:14 "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes" Luke 24:44.  The OT covenant and the OT law could not make anyone righteous. Luke 24:44, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.”  Jesus Christ instituted a new covenant because the old covenant was now obsolete as are the OT laws. Hebrews 10:9 states that "He takes away the first [covenant] that He may establish the second [covenant]."  Jesus said in Matt 5:18 that "not one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."  What part of the OT law did Jesus NOT fulfill?

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, Benji said:

 What part of the OT law did Jesus NOT fulfill?

New topic has been made: Is the Old Testament Obsolete?

 

You're not even addressing what I wrote which makes me wonder if we are communicating in the same language. I did not say Jesus had not fulfilled the Law. You time and time again keep suggesting the OT is obsolete which is a false statement. The OT contains Grace and the foreshadowing of the Gospel. By making the Old Testament obsolete you're ignoring the very grace and gospel Old Testament saints were saved by.

 

Benji!!! Much Grace abounds in the OT. From the beginning:

Genesis 3:21 And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them.

Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”
 

The Ordo Salutis was the same in the OT as in the NT. No man has ever been saved by his own works of the Law. That was never my argument.

 

Quote

Then you notice that we are given the promise there of the certainty of the triumph of God and His way. The serpent was going to be bruised, his head would be bruised, he would be destroyed. Cannot you see that there is the prefiguring of Calvary? It was there he was put to an open shame, it was there he was defeated—all promised in the protevangel. And ultimately there is this idea which we can see so clearly in the light of subsequent Scripture, that the real seed of the woman is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Now there was the first announcement of this covenant. God did not call it a covenant at that point, but it was a foreshadowing of the covenant that later was made more explicit. - D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones

 

Benji, the verses above are acts of Grace by God in the Old Testament. In Genesis 3:15 the promised Messiah the OT saints believed appeared. From the very moment Adam failed and broke the Covenant of Works a then foreshadowing Covenant of grace was made by God. Yes, that Covenant was conditional which differs from the NT Covenant where God provides the conditions necessary.

 

Do I need to list all the Laws given in the NT? The NT contains Law and Grace, however, Jesus fulfills the Law and the conditions which are not only necessarily provided by God in salvation "by grace through faith" but to make us heirs in the Covenant.

 

You are equating the Old Testament as strictly Covenant of Sinai and Law. You're failing to admit that the foreshadowing of the Gospel appears in the Old Testament. Perhaps you should stop making it obsolete? If the Old Testament is obsolete then quit quoting from it! 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings @Benji 

 

(1) First nice to meet you!

 

(2) Is the issue you raise an issue in the congregation you belong to?

Or, this an issue you believe greater Christendom is struggling with?

 

(3a) Thanks for appealing to the Scriptures

On 7/7/2019 at 4:32 AM, Benji said:

Heb 8:13 "When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear."

 

(3b) What do the term/s 'first one' in the above quote refer to?

Does that term refer to:

 

(1) Noahic Covenant and the seven mitzvot of the children of Noah /שבע מצוות בני נח / הברית עם נוח?

 

(2) The various Abrahamic covenants  הברית עם אברהם?

 

(3)Aseret ha'Dibrot (the ten words/saying) or the Ten commandments

In both Exodus chapter 20 and Deuteronomy Chapter 5?

 

(4) Mosaic Covenant ברית משה and the Torah (Instruction / Law)'s 613 commandments?

 

(5) Davidic Covenant ברית דוד?

 

(6) The covenant mentioned in the book of Jeremiah chapter 31:31 ~ 31:40 ברית חדשה the  ברית עולם הבא???

 

(7) The Hebrew Bible or rather the whole (Mikra) מקרא or rather the (Tanakh)תנ"ך or the Old Testament literature?

 

(9) Two or more of the above?

 

(1) None of the above. Other? Please explain,

 

(8) None of the above, other? 

 

 

Grace, Peace, an Truth

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ben,

 

1. Me too!

 

2. Christians have struggled with the OT for 2000 years. I frequently hear Christians ask why don't we follow the whole bible? (Especially my Jewish nephew!)   Even worse I've heard Christians proclaim "God said it, I believe it, that settles it." Really? We don't honor the Sabbath because some Christians work between Friday at sunset and Saturday at sunset, and to work on the Sabbath is an abomination to God. The Ten Commandments say we must not work on the Sabbath, yet every child in Christian Sunday School learns the Ten Commandments.  The Sabbath commandment is not quoted in the NT so why even memorize it?  It is not binding on the Christian, granted the other nine are great commandments, so great they are quoted in the New Testament under which we live today, so they are binding, but not because they are found in the Ot but in the New.  We eat pork which is forbidden in the OT, we wear clothing of a mixed thread which is also forbidden. I have yet to celebrate a Passover which means I must be removed from the fellowship forever.  I have been reading Romans 6 & 7 where the apostle Paul says we are not under law but grace (Romans 6:13) and the law has no dominion over dead people (Romans 7) and since we were crucified with Christ we are dead to sin and the law. If we are not under the law and are dead to it and it is obsolete, then I would think we need to ignore it, yes it makes interesting reading but what will one get by reading it?  Condemnation.  Guilt.  Following it will not get us any closer to being right with God, in fact it may even hinder our growth.  We are not saved by works or by following the OT laws, we are saved by grace through faith.

 

3. IMHO "first one" means any of the covenants He made prior to the last one.  They have all been replaced with the everlasting one under which we live today.

 

Grace and peace to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, William said:

New topic has been made: Is the Old Testament Obsolete?

 

You're not even addressing what I wrote which makes me wonder if we are communicating in the same language. I did not say Jesus had not fulfilled the Law. You time and time again keep suggesting the OT is obsolete which is a false statement. The OT contains Grace and the foreshadowing of the Gospel. By making the Old Testament obsolete you're ignoring the very grace and gospel Old Testament saints were saved by.

 

Benji!!! Much Grace abounds in the OT. From the beginning:

Genesis 3:21 And the LORD God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins and clothed them.

Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”
 

The Ordo Salutis was the same in the OT as in the NT. No man has ever been saved by his own works of the Law. That was never my argument.

 

 

Benji, the verses above are acts of Grace by God in the Old Testament. In Genesis 3:15 the promised Messiah the OT saints believed appeared. From the very moment Adam failed and broke the Covenant of Works a then foreshadowing Covenant of grace was made by God. Yes, that Covenant was conditional which differs from the NT Covenant where God provides the conditions necessary.

 

Do I need to list all the Laws given in the NT? The NT contains Law and Grace, however, Jesus fulfills the Law and the conditions which are not only necessarily provided by God in salvation "by grace through faith" but to make us heirs in the Covenant.

 

You are equating the Old Testament as strictly Covenant of Sinai and Law. You're failing to admit that the foreshadowing of the Gospel appears in the Old Testament. Perhaps you should stop making it obsolete? If the Old Testament is obsolete then quit quoting from it! 2 Timothy 3:16-17.

I never said the OT does not contain grace. God has been gracious to mankind for generations and I praise Him for that, but we live in the age of grace and not under law. The law cannot, will not and does not justify us; it cannot does not and will not make us right with God. The law cannot and does and will not sanctify us; it cannot, does not and will not take us deeper with God and it cannot does not and will not make us more holy before Him. The law is good don't get me wrong but I prefer grace over law.   In Romans 7 we learn that the law has dominion only over you while you are alive. Once you die you are released from the law, (Romans 7:4.)  We died the day we received Christ and were buried with Him in baptism so the law no longer has any dominion over us and we are free from it. Praise God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 minute ago, Benji said:

I never said the OT does not contain grace. God has been gracious to mankind for generations and I praise Him for that, but we live in the age of grace and not under law. The law cannot, will not and does not justify us; it cannot does not and will not make us right with God. The law cannot and does and will not sanctify us; it cannot, does not and will not take us deeper with God and it cannot does not and will not make us more holy before Him. The law is good don't get me wrong but I prefer grace over law.   In Romans 7 we learn that the law has dominion only over you while you are alive. Once you die you are released from the law, (Romans 7:4.)  We died the day we received Christ and were buried with Him in baptism so the law no longer has any dominion over us and we are free from it. Praise God.

new york no GIF by Talk Stoop

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, Benji said:

I never said the OT does not contain grace. God has been gracious to mankind for generations and I praise Him for that, but we live in the age of grace and not under law. The law cannot, will not and does not justify us; it cannot does not and will not make us right with God. The law cannot and does and will not sanctify us; it cannot, does not and will not take us deeper with God and it cannot does not and will not make us more holy before Him. The law is good don't get me wrong but I prefer grace over law.   In Romans 7 we learn that the law has dominion only over you while you are alive. Once you die you are released from the law, (Romans 7:4.)  We died the day we received Christ and were buried with Him in baptism so the law no longer has any dominion over us and we are free from it. Praise God.

So you never sin?
 

  • Like 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always believed there's much to be said of simplicity, common sense. Not wishing to get into the worn, settled matter of law versus grace, find New Testament scripture most clear on all of this, would merely like to point out something. We know the Holy Bible is God's Book, inspired by the Holy Spirit. In a Holy Bible I'm looking at, there are 1450 pages of Old Testament, 445 pages of New Testament. While it's obvious the New Testament, alone, can save, a small portion of it, actually, that we don't need the Old Testament to learn the saving gospel of Jesus Christ, including how the Old Testament fits into all things, isn't it really, really obtuse to use the word obsolete, with respect to 1450 pages of GOD's word? Also, in my experience and opinion, I've found the book of Psalms indispensable to higher spirituality and the most comforting book of the Bible, many, many times. Just thought I'd point this out, find using the word obsolete, of anything of eternal God, rather noisome.

 

The Lord Jesus said this, before there was a New Testament:

 

"It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matthew 4:4

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HisNameJesus said:

I've always believed there's much to be said of simplicity, common sense. Not wishing to get into the worn, settled matter of law versus grace, find New Testament scripture most clear on all of this, would merely like to point out something. We know the Holy Bible is God's Book, inspired by the Holy Spirit. In a Holy Bible I'm looking at, there are 1450 pages of Old Testament, 445 pages of New Testament. While it's obvious the New Testament, alone, can save, a small portion of it, actually, that we don't need the Old Testament to learn the saving gospel of Jesus Christ, including how the Old Testament fits into all things, isn't it really, really obtuse to use the word obsolete, with respect to 1450 pages of GOD's word? Also, in my experience and opinion, I've found the book of Psalms indispensable to higher spirituality and the most comforting book of the Bible, many, many times. Just thought I'd point this out, find using the word obsolete, of anything of eternal God, rather noisome.

 

The Lord Jesus said this, before there was a New Testament:

 

"It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matthew 4:4

 

Pardner, the Law ever saved and was never meant to save a single person and the only Human to ever live the Law without incident is Yashuah ha'Mashiah and even He proclaimed the Law is not finished. (Matt 27:50-60 &Matt 5:17)

 

The. misnamed, Mosaic Law is, to this day, condemning Lost People to Eternal, never ending, Death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Becky said:

So you never sin?
 

Like 100% of the rest of mankind, I sin every day in my eyes and in the eyes of the world, but I will not judge myself on Judgment Day nor will the world judge me, God will judge me by what His eyes have seen. He is after all the final Judge.

 

Ephesians 1:4 "Even before He made the world, God loved us and chose us in Christ to be holy and without fault in his eyes.

 

1 Cor 1:7b & 8, "...our Lord Jesus Christ will also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. 

 

Romans 8:1 "There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.

 

Hebrews 13:20-21, "Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is well pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen."

 

Ephesians 5:25b-26-27  "Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless."

 

Let's see; holy, without fault, blameless, no condemnation, perfect in every good work, without stain, wrinkle or any other blemish!  But how and why?  Because of Christ's blood!

 

Matt 26:28 "This is my blood of the (New) covenant."

 

Romans 5:9 "Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God's wrath through Him."

 

Ephesians 1:7 "In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace."

 

1 Peter 1:2 "You have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance."

 

I LOVE grace!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff

Thanks 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello @Benji 

 

(1) Thank you for your quick response.

 

(2) Thank you for the spirit in which your responded

 

(3) I agree with your contention that Christians are not under the Torah(the mosaic law).

Also, I assume that even before the average individual converted to Christianity that he or she was not actually observing the Torah or its 613 commandments.

This makes since to me for according to the Pentateuch The Mosaic law was given to Israel and her descents(Deuteronomy 29:28) not to the world in general. History also testifies to this for we do see any other nations adopting classical Hebrew, reading the Pentateuch in Hebrew (and other Hebrew literature), and attempting to observe the 613 commandments.

 

22 hours ago, Benji said:

which means I must be removed from the fellowship forever.

Smile and be of good cheer! For the above only applies to you If you are a member of ancient Israel. However, most likely the Torah was neither given to you nor to your ancestors at mount Sinai. You can not be removed from fellowship if you were never a member!

22 hours ago, Benji said:

3. IMHO "first one" means any of the covenants He made prior to the last one.  They have all been replaced with the everlasting one under which we live today.

Really? Wow, so does that mean that "first one" would even apply to number # 6 in my list of covenants in post # 7 of this thread?  I am not sure I fully understand your point of view, but thank you for sharing.

 

 

Personally I take τὴν πρώτην the term translated as "first one" to be an accusative adjective singular and as mirroring Καινήν the term translated as "new covenant" although it only means "new" and is also a singular. Then I find that πεπαλαίωκεν the indicative perfect active verb describing the "first one" as becoming old is also a singular. This leads me to speculate that two singular covenants are being contrasted with each other in some way. Of, course this view only represents my opinion on the matter.

 

 

Grace and Peace

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
50 minutes ago, Ben Asher said:

Personally I take τὴν πρώτην the term translated as "first one" to be an accusative adjective singular and as mirroring Καινήν the term translated as "new covenant" although it only means "new" and is also a singular. Then I find that πεπαλαίωκεν the indicative perfect active verb describing the "first one" as becoming old is also a singular. This leads me to speculate that two singular covenants are being contrasted with each other in some way. Of, course this view only represents my opinion on the matter.

Please plain ol American English . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, Becky said:

Please plain ol American English . 

@Benji seems to believe that the term "first one" refers to "any of the covenants... ...made prior to the last one."  @Ben Asher's point is that grammatically the term "first one" refers to only one covenant since it is singular not plural.  The Greek verb (i.e. πεπαλαίωκεν) is also singular.  Thus the term "first one" could not "means any of the covenants... ...made prior to the last one" as Benji claimed.  One would expect plural forms if the author was referring to more than one covenant.

 

Does that help Becky?

  • Informative 1
  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
10 minutes ago, Origen said:

@Benji seems to believe that the term "first one" refers to "any of the covenants... ...made prior to the last one."  @Ben Asher's point is that grammatically the term "first one" refers to only one covenant since it is singular not plural.  The Greek verb (i.e. πεπαλαίωκεν) is also singular.  Thus the term "first one" could not "means any of the covenants... ...made prior to the last one" as Benji claimed.  One would expect plural forms if the author was referring to more than one covenant.

 

Does that help Becky?

YES  thanks @Origen  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 2:32 PM, Benji said:

One must be VERY careful mixing OT theology with NT theology. The NT says that God has made the OT obsolete.  Heb 8:13 "When God speaks of a “new” covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and will soon disappear."  And what is this "new covenant?"  Grace!  Grace replaces the law! In Romans 6:14 Paul tells us "For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace." When did this happen?  When you received Christ as Lord and Savior.  The lost are still under the law (this is the "will soon disappear" in the above quote) but the born again Christian has died to sin and the law and is now under grace.  Did the law ever love you?  Did the law ever give you any grace?  Did the law ever die for you? The law is a taskmaster. It stands over you with a Cat 'O Nine Tails waiting for you to sin and when you do it flails you a good one with guilt and condemnation.  Grace on the other hand offers you forgiveness, love, mercy and pity. 

 

I'll take grace, thank you very much!  Leave the law and its guilt and condemnation to those who think they can wing it on their own on Judgment Day.

The old testament is obsolete concerning the law and the inability of it to save and secure the lost sinner. That ended with the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. While the law and the prophets left gaps and inconsistencies in the spoken and written law , It was insufficient at the least . Only by the sacrifice of Jesus God would cover everything pertaining to life and salvation for all who would inherit the redemptive work of Christ on the cross. The death of Christ left " No stone unturned !"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Old Testament, from Genesis to Malachi is not “obsolete”.  Rather it is a collection of lies and “darn” lies by the people that killed Jesus.  How can we believe anything that Christ haters had to say?

 

Even the Apostle Paul confirms all of this.  As my Arminian friends are quick to point out over and over and over and over ... Romans is not about all men, it is about the Israelites.  Paul plucks the kernels of Truth from among the OT lies and tells us all about these Israelites in Romans Chapter 3 ...

 

[Rom 3:10-18 NASB] 10 as it is written, "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; 11 THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; 12 ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE." 13 "THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE, WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING," "THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS"; 14 "WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS"; 15 "THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD, 16 DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS, 17 AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN." 18 "THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES."

 

All of these quotes come from the OT and are talking about the Israelites.  So who wrote the whole Old Testament?  That’s right, those same Israelites that had “NONE RIGHTEOUS” and “DECEIVING” “TONGUES” with “NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES”.  So how can we trust anything that such a people wrote?

 

The only reasonable option is to completely discard the Old Testament and rely exclusively on the Christian written New Testament.  There really is no other reasonable choice.

 

 

[Hopefully, you saw the humor in this ... or at least no one here thinks it sounds like a good idea.😉

 

Edited by atpollard
  • Best Answer 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greetings @th1bill  

12 hours ago, th1bill said:

the Law ever saved and was never meant to save a single person

This is correct, the Torah/Pentateuch never once speaks of an eternal salvation, nor is the term 'eternal life' ever once used. Only in in Genesis 3:22 is the the concept eternal life ever once 'clearly' hinted at and then it is not in relation to the 613 commandments of the Law.

 

12 hours ago, th1bill said:

The. misnamed, Mosaic Law

It is usually called by the Biblical term Torah (meaning instruction). On this thread I have used 'Mosaic Law' simply for the sake of sticking to common parlance rather than using terms like Torah she-bi-khtav, Sifrei Torah, Tikkun, or Ḥamishah Ḥumshei Torah.

 

 

Grace and Peace

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shalom brother.

Ben, I would give a lot for people to examine the Jewish Bible, the Bible Yasuah ha'Mashiah taught Christianity from but the Devil has had his way with the scriptures since before bright individuals broke the continuous flow of the Word of our Elohim into chapter and verse addresses.

 

I have even been dumped on by one moderator on another forum for learning the original, the proper names of our Elohim and put upon as one thinking of himself as better than anyone else... just astonishing.  From the stage, running women and liquor, my LORD, YHWH, gave me the heart to seek His Face in everything and my conclusion is such people as those of us that seek to dedicate our whole lives to YHWH are found to be despicable to, even, the average man in the Worship Services.

 

Shalom and all of YHWH's blessings for you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you @th1bill 

 

I think what you are getting at is sometime that the NT is actually very clear on; the importance of the Jewish Scriptures/Hebrew Bible in the Christian life.

 

Take for example:

Quote

 

2 Timothy 3:15 ~ 17 (ESV)

from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

 

 

(1) Paul wrote the above to Timothy before the there was a completed NT

(2) Paul references to Scriptures that Timothy was acquainted with from his childhood which in contact can obviously not be referring to not yet completed NT scriptures/canon.

(3) Paul's claim is that Jewish Scriptures can lead on to Christ/Messiah Jesus(Yeshua)

(4) Paul list some educational and practical benefits of studying the Jewish Scriptures/OT.

 

Yes, today Christians can apply this verse to the completed 66 books of the Bible, however I think we should not forgot that in the original context it spoke of the OT/Hebrew Bible.

 

Another verse that I believe is well worth mentioning


 

Quote

 

2 Corinthians 3:14,15

But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away. Yes, this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts.  But when one[c] turns to the Lord, the veil is removed.

 

 

(1) hardened minds = veil over hearts.

The issue that Paul mentions here is not something within the old covenant but something that is within the hearts/minds of men and women.

 

(2) When on turns to the Lord or I assume when one becomes a Christian the veil /Harding is removed.

 

Now, if the above is true and I believe that it is then there is more reason for the Christian to study the old covenant because he/she can now read/see clearly with the veil or Harding.

 

 

Grace and Peace

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/11/2019 at 9:32 AM, Ben Asher said:

 

 

(1) hardened minds = veil over hearts.

The issue that Paul mentions here is not something within the old covenant but something that is within the hearts/minds of men and women.

 

(2) When on turns to the Lord or I assume when one becomes a Christian the veil /Harding is removed.

 

Now, if the above is true and I believe that it is then there is more reason for the Christian to study the old covenant because he/she can now read/see clearly with the veil or Harding.

 

 

Grace and Peace

 

 

I do find this argument interesting. Like once saved... To get picky, tho the OT Covenant did not save anyone, neither did the NT one. After all, only the Giver of the covenants can save. So there 😛😊.

The Berean Study Bible would have a hard time with disregarding the OT. It's like throwing out the NT baby (or Baby?) with the bathwater. I would like to add to this conversation, that before i really knew Lord Yeshua Messiah (tried to cover all the bases there), i started to find the lineages of the OT fascinating. The stories jumped out at me. Can we have a NT without the OT veil? Some of us (well, me) need the old cat o niner. And yet i still rebel. And i hate me for it when i know better. Whoops, off subject. Has Benji ever visited a Messianic Synagogue? It's good to know your history. See today's Millenials.

BTW, what's a Harding?

Edited by Even So
forgot the word veil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...