Is there a better option?
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Meat Coming Soon: His Appointed Times
- Thread starter Mark C
- Start date
Hebrews 8:6-7 says “But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
If Christ is the heavenly mediator of the same covenant established at Sinai, why does it say a better covenant built on better promises? No matter how it is sliced, it seems there is something different covenant wise. I don’t see how not one jot or tittle is changed and yet there is an entirely new high priest and not one that is specified at Sinai. I don’t understand how nothing has changed and yet it is not the same.
'Aim, purpose, goal'. .. the Greek is 'telos'
If it means 'termination, end' then Christ's own words stand against Him because all is not fulfilled and heaven and,earth are still here.
Oh ok I see that in the list of possibles. That doesn’t really change the meaning though. That’s kind of how I understand it before. Christ is the end, the culmination, the goal, where it was leading, the person that the school master was supposed to guide us to.
The word 'covenant' does not appear in verse seven. The problem was not and never has been the covenant. The problem is 'them', see verse 8. The imperfect priesthood was the problem and is the primary subject of Hebrews.
The new covenant is with the house of Israel and the house of Judah and will (future) write the Torah on our hearts. Evidence that it is fulfilled is that no more will a man teach his brother 'know the Lord...' see Heb. 8:8-11 and Jer. 31:31-34 (but see in the context of the whole chapter, this is how YHVH restores the divorced house of Israel, aka Ephraim. Cue Jer. 3:6-12 and Romans 7:1-7ff)
If Torah was written on our hearts, Mark C wouldn't be posting.g a thread to remind us all if the upcoming feasts...
All of what is fulfilled? All of The law or all of the prophets or both? I only see the law mentioned in that passage and in my understanding Christ fulfilled/kept the law perfectly, he was the first and only person to do so, and then he offered his own blood. He fulfilled all righteousness, the law that nobody else kept perfectly had now been kept perfectly, thus fulfilled.
YES! But, if He is also the Lawgiver (James 4:12) and He stood in the burning bush (Ex. 3:2-14) and His Law says 'throughout your generations, in all your dwelling places, continually/forever ' (Lev. 23:14, 21, 31, 41), then it behooves us to 'keep My commandments. '
The only thing fulfilled are the sacrifices.
But, the Torah has not all been fulfilled. One previously quited example us Deut. 30:1-10. Notice verse 4 is quited by Yeshua in Matthew 24:31 as a future event.
Take a look at the Greek behind 'fulfilled.' Pleroo means 'fill up, or bring to the full'. If can't mean abolish or 'do away with' else Yeshua said 'I did not cone to abolish but to
Zec, Ezekiel 44:15 clearly points to future sacrifices that involve fat and blood. Hard for Christendom to wrap minds around because we've been inculcated otherwise, but there are multiple prophecies involving future sacrifices.. Zechariah 14:16-21 is another.
Let’s say for sake of argument, that verse 7 is speaking only of the priesthood (I don’t believe that it is because if we keep reading it seems clear that it continues talking about the covenant) but let’s say it is, that is still a change from the original covenant. How is it not a change?
Edit: at least for me, I can’t see that as not being a change, and really a huge change.
Last edited:
How do you come to that conclusion, like what passages state that to be the case?
Edit: I’m not sure how one can separate parts of the covenant out and change them and it still be the same covenant. Galatians 3:15 KJV
[15] “Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.” Even human covenants cannot be added to with out changing the covenant.
Last edited:
Prophecy is always open for interpretation. It never seems to get fulfilled quite the way we expect. Wasn’t John the Baptist prophesied as Elijah or someone? Even so, any potential sacrifices that could be reinstated would be after Christ’s return when all bets are off anyway.
John the Baptist could have been Elijah to them if they had listened. That's at least how I understood it.
It seems that Duet 30:1-10 can be fulfilled by Israelites believing in and putting their trust in Yeshua as he fulfilled all righteousness and his righteousness is applied to them.
What John the Baptist said about himself has always fascinated me in that he seems to be concealing who he was in a way. At the same time other passages seem to make it perfectly clear who John was.
Brother, the new covenant is with Israel. If you are grafted, then you are part of Israel. Therefore, Deut. 30 applies to you.
A good explanation of how a Gentile like me became Israel.
Romans 2
25¶For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.
26So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?
27And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law?
28For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh.
29But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.
There is neither Jew nor gentile, but we are all one in Christ. Hebrews 11 and 12 make it clear that the true promised land is a heavenly one. It says that we are not come unto the mountain that might be touched, rather “But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.
Does this not show that the keeping of the ceremonial aspects of the Law are irrelevant?