fulfilled feasts

[Shar]

3 hours ago, Joline said:

I do not understand the significance, nor the connection you are making.

Lu 16:16  The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

Mt 11:13  For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

 

Joh 18:36  Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Heb 2: 5 ¶  For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.

2:8  Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him.  But now we see not yet all things put under him.
 

Where are you getting your teaching of an earthly kingdom from? I would agree that John's baptism may have included the law and the prophets, but Christ and the Apostles spoke of his heavenly kingdom. So again what are your teachings concerning an earthly worldly reign, and where do you get them Shar?

From Revelation, Isaiah, Zechariah, Ezekiel, which all speak of our Lord's coming physical reign here on Earth, the Future Kingdom on Earth, His restoration of Israel, the Priests and the worship, The Glory of God returning to the Temple, and the division of the Land of Israel and its boundaries re-established.  Start with these books in the OT and read them carefully. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Shar said:

From Revelation, Isaiah, Zechariah, Ezekiel, which all speak of our Lord's coming physical reign here on Earth, the Future Kingdom on Earth, His restoration of Israel, the Priests and the worship, The Glory of God returning to the Temple, and the division of the Land of Israel and its boundaries re-established.  Start with these books in the OT and read them carefully. 

So, nothing from the new covenant teachings? What I am asking is where are you getting your views on this from?

[Shar]

6 minutes ago, Joline said:

So, nothing from the new covenant teachings? What I am asking is where are you getting your views on this from?

I said Revelation.  I see now where you are coming from.  You have divorced yourself from the OT or have valued it less than the NT.   This is something to be concerned about.  Why?  Because always and whenever Jesus, the disciples, and Paul ever talked about Scripture or referenced it, they were only speaking about the OLD TESTAMENT.   The NT did not exist.  Manuscripts were not found until in the 3rd century AD and the Council of Nicea did not convene until the 4th century AD.   The whole of the church studied, read and relied on the Scriptures of the OT.   Get to know them!  God's promises and his plan for the future are greatly detailed here.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Shar said:

I said Revelation.  I see now where you are coming from.  You have divorced yourself from the OT or have valued it less than the NT.   This is something to be concerned about.  Why?  Because always and whenever Jesus, the disciples, and Paul ever talked about Scripture or referenced it, they were only speaking about the OLD TESTAMENT.   The NT did not exist.  Manuscripts were not found until in the 3rd century AD and the Council of Nicea did not convene until the 4th century AD.   The whole of the church studied, read and relied on the Scriptures of the OT.   Get to know them!  God's promises and his plan for the future are greatly detailed here.

I do not reject the old testament, nor have I divorced myself from it? You did not quote the old testament? You quoted from the prophets? The scripture includes  three parts, the law, the prophets and the writings. The law contains several covenants. So I do not know why this attack on me? As for the new testament not existing, it was preached for sure. But I cannot understand why the attack? I do not recall saying anything to offend you.

[Shar]

Just now, Joline said:

I do not reject the old testament, nor have I divorced myself from it? You did not quote the old testament? You quoted from the prophets? The scripture includes  three parts, the law, the prophets and the writings. The law contains several covenants. So I do not know why this attack on me? As for the new testament not existing, it was preached for sure. But I cannot understand why the attack? I do not recall saying anything to offend you.

Actually not attacking, but responding to you stating "nothing from the NT."  Besides Revelation, there were numerous references to the prophets.  These men who hold the prophecies of the coming kingdom.  You asked me where I got this information, as if it was something new and I responded it as mostly detailed in the OT.  I did not mean for you to take offense, and for that, I deeply apologize.  I guess the way you stated "nothing from the NT" made me believe that the OT did not count.  When you asked where I got this information, it seemed logical to me that you have not been studying the OT.  Sorry, if there was any miscommunication.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Shar said:

Actually not attacking, but responding to you stating "nothing from the NT."  Besides Revelation, there were numerous references to the prophets.  These men who hold the prophecies of the coming kingdom.  You asked me where I got this information, as if it was something new and I responded it as mostly detailed in the OT.  I did not mean for you to take offense, and for that, I deeply apologize.  I guess the way you stated "nothing from the NT" made me believe that the OT did not count.  When you asked where I got this information, it seemed logical to me that you have not been studying the OT.  Sorry, if there was any miscommunication.

What I meant by nothing from the new testament teachers of Christ. As I said to someone else I am not seeing these things you are speaking of in their teachings. When I asked where you got your views from, I wanted to know how you came to understand the prophets the way you do is all. Especially since I do not see this teaching in the new covenant teachings. I have been quite open about the fact I do not agree with the teachings of the Pharisees as a sect of Judaism. I know some people do not like that, but I believe stating it that way is much more culturally accurate to the first century context. As I see what I believe to be verses speaking against the peculiars of that sect. Such midrash aggada, which is exegesis through storytelling. 

2Ti 4:4  And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables <3454>.
Tit 1:14  Not giving heed to Jewish fables <3454>, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.
2Pe 1:16  For we have not followed cunningly devised fables <3454>, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

3454 μυθος muthos moo’-thos

 

perhaps from the same as 3453 (through the idea of tuition); TDNT-4:762,610; n m

 

AV-fable 5; 5

 

1) a speech, word, saying
2) a narrative, story
2a) a true narrative
2b) a fiction, a fable
2b1) an invention, a falsehood

so, I asked where you got your views from.

[Shar]

46 minutes ago, Joline said:

What I meant by nothing from the new testament teachers of Christ. As I said to someone else I am not seeing these things you are speaking of in their teachings. When I asked where you got your views from, I wanted to know how you came to understand the prophets the way you do is all. Especially since I do not see this teaching in the new covenant teachings. I have been quite open about the fact I do not agree with the teachings of the Pharisees as a sect of Judaism. I know some people do not like that, but I believe stating it that way is much more culturally accurate to the first century context. As I see what I believe to be verses speaking against the peculiars of that sect. Such midrash aggada, which is exegesis through storytelling. 

2Ti 4:4  And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables <3454>.
Tit 1:14  Not giving heed to Jewish fables <3454>, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.
2Pe 1:16  For we have not followed cunningly devised fables <3454>, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

3454 μυθος muthos moo’-thos

 

perhaps from the same as 3453 (through the idea of tuition); TDNT-4:762,610; n m

 

AV-fable 5; 5

 

1) a speech, word, saying
2) a narrative, story
2a) a true narrative
2b) a fiction, a fable
2b1) an invention, a falsehood

so, I asked where you got your views from.

The scripture you quoted has nothing to do with Jewish Midrash, but rather what will happen in the end times.  During this time, people will turn away from the truth and seek teachers to tell them what they want to hear.  They will turn away from scripture.  In Titus, a group was teaching error for dishonest gain.  We see plenty of that on TV today.  In Peter, he is assuring others they have not followed cleverly invented stories, like some who create stories for a following, but that he was an eyewitness to the majesty of Christ.

Remember, they are talking about the only scripture that existed, the OT.  The letters to various churches mostly addressed problems in the churches and did not substitute for all of God's word.  We must look to the whole of Scripture to get solid teaching and understanding.  If you look only to the NT to authenticate you will miss a lot.  See the OT Scriptures can exist without the NT.  Jesus said, "Search the Scriptures, for they tell of Me".  He was speaking of the OT.  However, the NT could not exist without the OT.  A large amount of that which is written in the NT has a OT reference.

You referenced fables.  We know fables are stories that are made up with a purpose to teach a moral or spiritual lesson.  Do you know that parables are the same thing?  Yet, Jesus and the many rabbis before Him taught with parables.  Parables were not new when Jesus began to teach.  Parables were a common way to teach.  Even some of the parables Jesus taught were actually taught earlier.  Jesus just further expounded on them.

A Midrash is the equivalent of our commentaries.  Just like we sometimes will seek out a commentary to give us some greater insight to our reading, so did the Jews.  The Midrash would expound on a certain Biblical text, clarify or expound on a point of law, or develop some illustration to a moral principal or character.

To indicate that these verses can be taken for more of an anti-Jewish stance toward Jewish teachings is not fair nor accurate.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Shar said:

All the Apostles upon whose teachings I rely were JewishThe scripture you quoted has nothing to do with Jewish Midrash, but rather what will happen in the end times.  During this time, people will turn away from the truth and seek teachers to tell them what they want to hear.  They will turn away from scripture.  In Titus, a group was teaching error for dishonest gain.  We see plenty of that on TV today.  In Peter, he is assuring others they have not followed cleverly invented stories, like some who create stories for a following, but that he was an eyewitness to the majesty of Christ.

Remember, they are talking about the only scripture that existed, the OT.  The letters to various churches mostly addressed problems in the churches and did not substitute for all of God's word.  We must look to the whole of Scripture to get solid teaching and understanding.  If you look only to the NT to authenticate you will miss a lot.  See the OT Scriptures can exist without the NT.  Jesus said, "Search the Scriptures, for they tell of Me".  He was speaking of the OT.  However, the NT could not exist without the OT.  A large amount of that which is written in the NT has a OT reference.

You referenced fables.  We know fables are stories that are made up with a purpose to teach a moral or spiritual lesson.  Do you know that parables are the same thing?  Yet, Jesus and the many rabbis before Him taught with parables.  Parables were not new when Jesus began to teach.  Parables were a common way to teach.  Even some of the parables Jesus taught were actually taught earlier.  Jesus just further expounded on them.

A Midrash is the equivalent of our commentaries.  Just like we sometimes will seek out a commentary to give us some greater insight to our reading, so did the Jews.  The Midrash would expound on a certain Biblical text, clarify or expound on a point of law, or develop some illustration to a moral principal or character.

To indicate that these verses can be taken for more of an anti-Jewish stance toward Jewish teachings is not fair nor accurate.

It is not anti-Jewish, the apostles were Jewish....since when is one sectarian teaching of Judaism vs another sectarian teaching of Judaism considered anti semetic???? It is caution at the teaching of the Pharisees, or even the Sadducees. And I have read the whole of the new testament, and it does speak of beware of the teachings of them. Parables are called parables, not fables or stories. Parables like the prophets use a lot of symbolism and need proper interpretation. Of which scripture says.... concerning both

Parables...... Jesus often explained his parables to them

Mt 13:10  And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?

11  He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12  For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13  Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

Mr 4:11  And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
 

as for the prophets....

Ac 13:27  For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him.

3  How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4  Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5  Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
 

as well as refusing John which was a prophet of God sent to them to prepare the way for Christ himself.

Lu 7:30  But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him.
Mt 21:25  The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?
Mt 21:32  For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.
 

So, there is quite a bit more to show the ruling sects did not even believe Johns preaching nor understand the voices of the prophets. Therefore I wanted to know where this was found in the teachings of the new testament teachings of Christ.

Edited February 12, 2016 by Joline

[Qnts2]

6 hours ago, Joline said:

The book does speak of his priesthood according to the order of Melchzedek. When we speak of the new testament kingship we speak of priesthood. When we speak of priesthood in the new covenant we speak of kingship. For neither king and priest are separate in the order of Melchizedek.

As it is said the gospel especially to the Jews began with John's baptism. which he preached the coming wrath and to escape it. The lamb of God which takes away the sins of the world

If Christ were on earth He would not be a priest, if Christ is not raised you are still dead in your sins. Melchizedek was a KING/PRIEST. So to is Christ. And so too is his priesthood a Royal priesthood.

Being raised from the dead is important because if Jesus was not raised from the dead, it means that there is no resurrection of the dead accomplished by His work, and His death did not accomplish salvation. Salvation is more then forgiveness of sins, as it does not bring dead people to life. The resurrection is death to life. Jesus said He came to give life.

The discussion of Jesus being of the priesthood, not Levitical, is not a major topic of the book of Hebrews, but is an explanation concerning the need for believers to continue relying on Temple sacrifices.

Hebrews 6:1 explains something about the book of Hebrews.

Hebrews 6:1 Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, ² of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. ³ And this we will do, if God permits. ⁴ For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, ⁵ and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,

The problem for the Hebrews was that they were not yet understanding the very basics, or elementary teaching about the Messiah. The writer of Hebrews desired to move on beyond the elementary teachings. What they desire to? More discussion about the heavenly gift, partaking of the Holy Spirit, and finally, the age to come (In Jewish terminology, the age to come would be the Messianic reign on earth). 

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, Qnts2 said:

Being raised from the dead is important because if Jesus was not raised from the dead, it means that there is no resurrection of the dead accomplished by His work, and His death did not accomplish salvation. Salvation is more then forgiveness of sins, as it does not bring dead people to life. The resurrection is death to life. Jesus said He came to give life.

The discussion of Jesus being of the priesthood, not Levitical, is not a major topic of the book of Hebrews, but is an explanation concerning the need for believers to continue relying on Temple sacrifices.

Hebrews 6:1 explains something about the book of Hebrews.

Hebrews 6:1 Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, ² of instruction about washings and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. ³ And this we will do, if God permits. ⁴ For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, ⁵ and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,

The problem for the Hebrews was that they were not yet understanding the very basics, or elementary teaching about the Messiah. The writer of Hebrews desired to move on beyond the elementary teachings. What they desire to? More discussion about the heavenly gift, partaking of the Holy Spirit, and finally, the age to come (In Jewish terminology, the age to come would be the Messianic reign on earth). 

If Jesus is not raised you are dead in your sins...=.no eternal atonement has been made for sins

37  But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.
38  Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:
39  And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
 

Salvation can be applied many ways. as Moses spoke of the salvation of the Lord when he opened the sea. Salvation from wrath, etc. but in Christ Jesus it is salvation from death itself, things which could not be accomplished by the law. That is the power of his heavenly sacrifice as our high priest. The Levitical priesthood was a mere shadow, the reality of the uttermost salvation is in our high priest in the order of Me;chizedek.

In apostolic Jewish terminology the world to come, it is the next world and the next life as well. The kingdom promised Abraham.

this is going beyond the basics of milk

Heb 6:5  And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6  If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
 

Edited February 12, 2016 by Joline