@ZecAustin, thats an interesting take but you are conflating the instructions ha owlam with the comments of Christ. Christ (to my knowledge) didnt say that they were 'ha owlam', just that they were till heaven and earth passed. The ha owlam statements were around the time of Sinai through possibly Isaiah and that may be a conservative date. Still Isaiah is 700 years til Christ, plenty of reason to say owlam.
-
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.
Law, commands, or instructions?
- Thread starter Verifyveritas76
- Start date
Of course! It's right there, in Genuine Print, isn't it?
But I would also contend with almost equal fervor that "ALL" is hardly even REMOTELY "fulfilled" (in spite of certain "usurper" contentions to the contrary!
)Just off the top o' my head, Damascus is still a city, rather than a 'ruinous heap'. (But we're gettin' close.) Unlike the 'preterists' I don't believe for a second that what's coming in Revelation (including the "Mark of the Beast" that I've been talking about for as long as I've been doing radio - almost 20 years now) - and, gee, if He is "coming back," THAT certainly isn't 'fulfilled' yet, either.
and I would be remiss if I did not point out the inherent "AND" clause in the logic! Last I looked, yes, BOTH are still there. And please don't insult anyone's intelligence by trying to deny the obvious. Especially if it makes Yahushua out to be a liar.
Pul-ease.
Absolutely. And those who have been attempting to keep the Moedim (Appointed times of YHVH - no - He NEVER calls them "Jewish holy days" - they are HIS, to be remembered "in all your dwelling places ") would know that He fulfulled PERFECTLY the 'spring feasts' (Pesach, unleavened bread, First fruits, and then Shavuot) exactly as prophesied.
It's why I suggest (and He commands) that we keep ALL of His moedim, too...from Sabbath to the climax of the 'fall feasts' that culminate with Sukkot (aka obviously symbolic of a 'wedding feast!') -- so that we will NOT be fooled.
Finally, concerning "ha olam" which is often rendered as "forever" but really more directly translates as 'the world', or even 'all that is'/everything...
yes, it's good to understand the Hebrew words used, in context.
Which is about as close to a to a tautology as you'll find, especially given multiple translations from His original language.
In short, when "Heaven and Earth," really pass, and we get to a 'world-ending' climax, I don't think we'll have to argue about it here.
Last edited:
I'll work on backing it up with scripture. Thank you.
RE: "As it was in the days of Noach...so will it be..." in that yet-to-be-fulfilled part:
Disagree.
No - terms that have to do with "genetics" and DNA are NOT in the original Hebrew. Not hard to postulate explanations, although I think that from "as it was in the days of," to a dozen arguments that are both ancient and current headlines, I don't find the dots at all difficult to connect. "Your mileage may vary".
But to leap to the claim that it must have "NOTHING to do with genetics" is utterly unsupportable.
Firmament/canopy before Noach, today's sky arguably thereafter. No rains, no rainbows before; early rains and latter rains thereafter. Probably carnivores, too. Gee, do we really THINK that a truly major change in His creation (ha eretz) would NOT result in modified instruction? (I mean really. Did incest prohibitions come along with changing [decaying!] genetics - or just who did Adam's offspring marry?) Cutting lifespans by 90% isn't enough?
It seems to me that it just requires a WHOLE lotta ridiculous obfuscation to deny the simply fact that the "Torah Made Flesh" just really, truly MEANS what He keeps saying.
Disagree.
No - terms that have to do with "genetics" and DNA are NOT in the original Hebrew. Not hard to postulate explanations, although I think that from "as it was in the days of," to a dozen arguments that are both ancient and current headlines, I don't find the dots at all difficult to connect. "Your mileage may vary".
But to leap to the claim that it must have "NOTHING to do with genetics" is utterly unsupportable.
Firmament/canopy before Noach, today's sky arguably thereafter. No rains, no rainbows before; early rains and latter rains thereafter. Probably carnivores, too. Gee, do we really THINK that a truly major change in His creation (ha eretz) would NOT result in modified instruction? (I mean really. Did incest prohibitions come along with changing [decaying!] genetics - or just who did Adam's offspring marry?) Cutting lifespans by 90% isn't enough?
It seems to me that it just requires a WHOLE lotta ridiculous obfuscation to deny the simply fact that the "Torah Made Flesh" just really, truly MEANS what He keeps saying.
Last edited:
I know this is only tangentially related to the main topic of this thread, but for some time now, I've believed the permission to eat meat was largely because of the decline in soil nutrient quality post-flood. Much of the originally-created, high-quality soil that was in the pre-flood world would have either been buried under sediment (contributing to oil deposits, possibly?), entombed directly in the rocks, or else washed into the sea contributing to its saltiness. I'm not a farmer, but I'm pretty sure a plant's nutritional value is largely determined by the nutrients it can pull out of the ground. After the flood, a new layer of soil had to be started from the ground up (pun intended).
I don't have the time to delve into this one too deeply, as I've gotten pretty busy as of late, but the idea of God changing with circumstances, eras, etc. seems to me to be in line with what the pro-homo group espouses. Doesn't this line of thinking give more ammo for those who argue for "social progress"?
Among a million other things; many of them once called "abomination" -- now called a "mandate" from that "other master" we were warned about.
If the repeated prohibition (Deut. 4:2; 12:32, and the "last warning in the Book") prohibiting "adding to" and "subtracting from " is "done away with" not only do we call Him a liar, but (Matthew 23) a "hypocrite" as well. No way.
I have not kept up on this thread very well (sigh). In all of the discussion I think, an important dimension has been overlooked. The maintenance and compliance with Torah is not an end in itself, but rather it is a means to the end of maintaining the covenant relationship with the LORD. The face of Moses was alight in the giving of Torah, because it was a special grace granted to Israel (cf. Shemoth 34 amd 2 Cor 3). In Torah, Israel was given insight on how to please the LORD of heaven and earth and to maintain a relationship to the Holy One. However, the difficulty came when obedience to instruction overshadowed the primacy of the covenant with the Living LORD (Isa 1:10ff). Torah existed (and exists) for relationship.
YHWH cannot 'break his law' because he has no need to maintain covenant with himself. Jesus likewise could not 'break his law,' because he is also YHWH.
What about us now? I think there are two errors that are equally dangerous:
One error is to treat the Word of the LORD (any of it) as a trifle. I do not think anyone here intends to do so. Meditation on Torah guarantees blessing from the LORD (Ps. 1) and its converse . . . is not so good.
The other error is to treat the sacrifice of Jesus as if it is devoid of power. In the crucifixion everything changed. Jesus has given us authority and power to be called 'sons of the LORD' (Jn 1:12ff). The Holy Spirit of the LORD indwells us (1 Cor 6:19). Torah is good and has not changed. The world changed, utterly, in the coming of the LORD. To overlook or underestimate the death of the LORD in the creation of a new covenant written upon our hearts . . . if we should do so we will not escape judgment.
My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 Whoever says "I know him" but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,
5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him:
6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.
7 Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard.
8 At the same time, it is a new commandment that I am writing to you, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining.
9 Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness.
10 Whoever loves his brother abides in the light, and in him there is no cause for stumbling.
11 But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
12 I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven for his name's sake.
13 I am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I write to you, children, because you know the Father.
14 I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one. (1Jo 2:1-14 ESV)
YHWH cannot 'break his law' because he has no need to maintain covenant with himself. Jesus likewise could not 'break his law,' because he is also YHWH.
What about us now? I think there are two errors that are equally dangerous:
One error is to treat the Word of the LORD (any of it) as a trifle. I do not think anyone here intends to do so. Meditation on Torah guarantees blessing from the LORD (Ps. 1) and its converse . . . is not so good.
The other error is to treat the sacrifice of Jesus as if it is devoid of power. In the crucifixion everything changed. Jesus has given us authority and power to be called 'sons of the LORD' (Jn 1:12ff). The Holy Spirit of the LORD indwells us (1 Cor 6:19). Torah is good and has not changed. The world changed, utterly, in the coming of the LORD. To overlook or underestimate the death of the LORD in the creation of a new covenant written upon our hearts . . . if we should do so we will not escape judgment.
My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.
2 He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
3 And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 Whoever says "I know him" but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him,
5 but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him:
6 whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.
7 Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment that you had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word that you have heard.
8 At the same time, it is a new commandment that I am writing to you, which is true in him and in you, because the darkness is passing away and the true light is already shining.
9 Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness.
10 Whoever loves his brother abides in the light, and in him there is no cause for stumbling.
11 But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
12 I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven for his name's sake.
13 I am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I write to you, children, because you know the Father.
14 I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one. (1Jo 2:1-14 ESV)
in spite of certain "usurper" contentions to the contrary!
I'm not sure who you are referring to here. usurper?
So which parts of the Law are not fulfilled? I noticed that the parts that you quoted as not being fulfilled are some of the prophecies from long after the law was given (Damascus) or prophecy that wasnt even given when Jesus was making the comment in Matthew 5 (Revelation). Jesus only stated that one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. To use something not included in the statement (prophecy) as negative evidence is a bit misleading.
Also, if all isn't fulfilled as you claim, why would Jesus know "that all things were now accomplished that the Scripture might be fulfilled" in John 19:28 Perhaps you are defining a larger "all" than Jesus was.
This was my question.
I'm sure you are attempting disdain or some other hard to convey emotion, however, "Pul-ease" neither answers the question nor gives background for your answer.
It doesn't take much intelligence to recognize that the earth and heaven are still there. It does however require a bit more to examine a different point of view that challenges a preconceived bias. Even more to debate a topic without resorting to childish projections.
Perhaps Isaiah was speaking out of line when he wrote for God, Your new moons and your appointed feasts (mow'ed) my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them. Is 1:14 Last I checked, the passage is addressed to the Jews about their new moons and their appointed feasts or holy days. What am I missing?
In context is critical. I'd be interested to know the source of your direct translation. I went through and studied out the uses and context for the word (Strongs #5769) everywhere it occurs in scripture. It is true that it has been translated using the word "world" (1 time out of 439 times) but nowhere that I could find "all that is/everything.
Rather, my Hebrew Lexicon gives the definition for owlam as: A distant time in the past or future, as a time hidden from the present
The same word that is used to describe something infinite is also used to describe something finite as well as the word never. Context is everything and each use of "owlam" must be subject to how the subject is limited or defined by that passage as well as the rest of Scripture. Just because a passage uses the word owlam doesnt necessarily mean to infinity . . . and beyond.
Surely, you don't expect me to give you a pass on this. References will be necessary.
Obviously the genetic manipulation had something to do with the destruction. But those genetic changes (giants, weird animals etc) were a thing of the past after the Flood. What scriptural support do you have that would make you think that they had any bearing on how God changed specifically His dietary commands?
So . . . . .. you're saying, . . . . God . . . . . changed . . . . His . . . . Instruction?
How about a truly major change in Atonement and Sacrifice? How about when the creation kills the Creator? How about when the Sun is inexplicably
dark for 3 hours in the middle of the day? How about when the long dead are walking around town?
I have no idea what you are trying to say He keeps saying.
I think I just had a new revelation!!! If this view was true, it wouldn't matter about the claims of Revelation because Revelations was somehow added to Deuteronomy along with 60 other books!!! Is it just me, or does it seem nonsense to quote the Deuteronomy prohibition as stated above and use anything written past about 1500 BC as Scripture?
Not sure that I'd agree with the premise. In any of the changes from covenant to covenant and era to era, homosexual acceptance is one of those things that has always been an abomination and directly undermines one of the commands that has been included in every covenant, and has never changed, to multiply and replenish.
Well said @ABlessedMan, nicely explained.
The focus of my point was "social progressives" in the church using the changing eras argument. Homosexuality was the example I used to emphasize the point. Insert anything in there, the argument (social progress) is the same. Women preachers, gender bending, changing moral standards, abortion, you name it.
I think I understand where you're coming from, but for the commands etc to change, there must be a change of era. The next era change should be the Millennial Era. I'm sure that it will be argued for, but I cant see it being accepted by anyone who holds to the New Testament and understands the Old Testament.
No, there must be a change of command. It seems like you're wanting to throw everything away and start all over everytime but that's crazy talk. You aren't going to say bestiality is now allowed. You want to keep some prohibitions from the OT, you q want to pick which ones.
And yes God hates our festivals and new moons but He really likes His. As evidenced by the fact He celebrated them.
Paganism, infecting what self-describes as the "one, true, universal church" and claims authority to re-write His Word, "changing times and seasons," declaring things He calls abomination to be just fine, and the converse. Those who seek to follow HIM were called "anathema," "judaizers," and both purged and executed. 'Nuf said. But the poison remains, and helps explain why most of 'churchianity' is still in exile.
Last edited:
Let's start here for the rest.
The real point. And it permeates Scripture.
YOUR new moons, YOUR moedim.
(I will suggest that xmas and Ishtar-sun-god day make the same point. Isaiah - and the rest of his timefame - was talking to people who had adopted the same paganism that runs rampant today, and were being sent into exile, "shalach"-ed, as a direct result.)
The moedim are His! We are to 'remember' them, "throughout your generations," and "in all your dwelling places." Even in exile.
Men replaced His feasts with their own pagan traditions. ("By your traditions you have made the commandments of YHVH of no effect!" Mark 7, etc. And, yes, He was talking about a LOT of things.)
How many times does He condemn paganism masquerading as 'worship ? (starting with the 'golden calf' at Sinai. At least Aaron in his error tried to claim it was a "moed to YHVH!" Note that Yah wasn't having any of that.)
Repeatedly they failed to do/worship/keep/etc "with their whole heart." Look at Jeremiah 3:10. Do a search for "whole heart". ('kol lev/levavka')
The overwhelmingly predominate metaphor of the (multiple) exiles was IDOLATRY (adultery). It still is.
The cohenim were condemned for failing to "teach My people the difference" between the qadosh/'holy' and profane. Hosea 4:4 applies. "because you have rejected knowledge...you will NOT be priest to me, AND I WILL FORGET your children."
EVERY SINGLE BIT of that is NO less applicable today!
The real point. And it permeates Scripture.
YOUR new moons, YOUR moedim.
(I will suggest that xmas and Ishtar-sun-god day make the same point. Isaiah - and the rest of his timefame - was talking to people who had adopted the same paganism that runs rampant today, and were being sent into exile, "shalach"-ed, as a direct result.)
The moedim are His! We are to 'remember' them, "throughout your generations," and "in all your dwelling places." Even in exile.
Men replaced His feasts with their own pagan traditions. ("By your traditions you have made the commandments of YHVH of no effect!" Mark 7, etc. And, yes, He was talking about a LOT of things.)
How many times does He condemn paganism masquerading as 'worship ? (starting with the 'golden calf' at Sinai. At least Aaron in his error tried to claim it was a "moed to YHVH!" Note that Yah wasn't having any of that.)
Repeatedly they failed to do/worship/keep/etc "with their whole heart." Look at Jeremiah 3:10. Do a search for "whole heart". ('kol lev/levavka')
The overwhelmingly predominate metaphor of the (multiple) exiles was IDOLATRY (adultery). It still is.
The cohenim were condemned for failing to "teach My people the difference" between the qadosh/'holy' and profane. Hosea 4:4 applies. "because you have rejected knowledge...you will NOT be priest to me, AND I WILL FORGET your children."
EVERY SINGLE BIT of that is NO less applicable today!
Last edited:
Never, ever said it did!!!
But why do you refuse to admit that it while "heaven and earth" still exist (no, NOT 'infinity and beyond') isn't a pretty darn obvious timeframe?
And it's not like those same two witnesses don't REPEATEDLY show up to witness against us! (Deut. 30)
Asked, and answered. Directly above "Pul-ease".
In that case: NO! And I submit directly that the reasons are jes plain obvious. Look out the window. Sorry, but if the two witnesses that MOSES invoked and Yahushua reconfirmed had "passed" -- I think we'd know it. Hence my frustration.
Re: My comment, "If the repeated prohibition (Deut. 4:2; 12:32, and the "last warning in the Book") prohibiting "adding to" and "subtracting from " is "done away with" not only do we call Him a liar, but (Matthew 23) a "hypocrite" as well. No way."
You continue to confuse "prophecy" with "statutes, judgements, and commandments". That is WHY so much of the error (that I've addressed before, but won't keep repeating) has to do with confusing "instruction" with "Law"!
[Aside: He gives us 'instruction" every day! "Those He loves He chastens." What's the point of the Ruach haKodesh? (set-apart Spirit) Are those "new commandments" ? And HOW do we know it's from Him? Same as always: consistency with His Word.]
Yahushua fulfilled a myriad of specific prophecies and prophetic pictures BASED on the Moedim of YHVH (call 'em "shadow pictures of things to come," if you like, just remember that the Fall Feasts are YET to be fulfilled - 'revealed' to us, and it we want to be ready to recognize them if behooves us to practice them.)
PROPHECY is part of His 'instruction' - but NOT the same as "law". Prophets universally proclaim t'shuvah (return to Me; aka 'repent', but the Hebrew word is much more clear as to the real meaning!) Prophets elucidate, warn, cajole, explain, even occasionally kick some pagan butt (Elijah, fer sure) but NEVER changed His statutes, judgments, and commandments.
Again, and again! Deuteronomy 13 is key! If a 'prophet' tried such, he was NOT of Yah! And that went a double-portion for Yahushua! He Wrote it so we'd KNOW Who He Was (is, will be). Be like the Bereans! And remember what "Scripture" they searched out.
Finally, re: Revelation. More prophecy. And interestingly, a "second witness". And note that the "final command in Scripture" is NOT, repeat NOT, a change -- just another confirmation.
You continue to confuse "prophecy" with "statutes, judgements, and commandments". That is WHY so much of the error (that I've addressed before, but won't keep repeating) has to do with confusing "instruction" with "Law"!
[Aside: He gives us 'instruction" every day! "Those He loves He chastens." What's the point of the Ruach haKodesh? (set-apart Spirit) Are those "new commandments" ? And HOW do we know it's from Him? Same as always: consistency with His Word.]
Yahushua fulfilled a myriad of specific prophecies and prophetic pictures BASED on the Moedim of YHVH (call 'em "shadow pictures of things to come," if you like, just remember that the Fall Feasts are YET to be fulfilled - 'revealed' to us, and it we want to be ready to recognize them if behooves us to practice them.)
PROPHECY is part of His 'instruction' - but NOT the same as "law". Prophets universally proclaim t'shuvah (return to Me; aka 'repent', but the Hebrew word is much more clear as to the real meaning!) Prophets elucidate, warn, cajole, explain, even occasionally kick some pagan butt (Elijah, fer sure) but NEVER changed His statutes, judgments, and commandments.
Again, and again! Deuteronomy 13 is key! If a 'prophet' tried such, he was NOT of Yah! And that went a double-portion for Yahushua! He Wrote it so we'd KNOW Who He Was (is, will be). Be like the Bereans! And remember what "Scripture" they searched out.
Finally, re: Revelation. More prophecy. And interestingly, a "second witness". And note that the "final command in Scripture" is NOT, repeat NOT, a change -- just another confirmation.
Last edited:
While I'm no fan of big government, teenagers and the elderly absolutely need to pass some kind of driving test to be on the road; to suggest this is not an area needing oversight is off. Sure, if we lived in a world where parents all taught their kids to drive and raised them responsibly etc, but to think there would be no accidents caused by lifting this oversight ... please ... there would be tons of additional accidents...
This is a gross abuse of this passage. Simple exegesis starts by putting ourselves in the culture and audience to whom Yeshua was speaking.
He's speaking to His students, who have sat at His feet for some time learning, eating kosher with Him (we know for a fact He had to obey the dietary laws or else He failed to uphold the Law), and He tells them to not leave Israel. So they are living in a country, and are dressed in a religious manner, and he's saying "eat what is set before you". Only someone from a Gentile world view would imagine that He's telling them "eat garbage if someone puts it before you".
To Jews, it's an extreme honor to host a Rabbi in your house (Yeshua's students would be seen as Rabbis).
You break out the best food, best dishes, best everything. Nobody is going to give them garbage to eat.
There is a Pharasaical custom of only eating at the house of Jews whom you know or who are of high esteem, i.e. famous Rabbis... the idea is you don't know how kosher their food is. Maybe a gnat got in it when they were carelessly cooking and now it's unclean.
This is what Yeshua is referring to. "Look, since you're in Israel where we keep Kosher, and everyone who takes you in knows you are Rabbis, just trust ... and if they are sloppy or can only afford to give you bread or whatever, eat it so it won't be a chillul Hashem (making G-d look bad)"
I'm confident if He was sending them to Gentiles (who did not keep Kosher) He would have clarified, but since He specifically forbade them from going to Gentile nations we know the context.