LET'S TALK ABOUT THE BOOK OF HEBREWS

[Verifyveritas76]

Sorry, @Verifyveritas76 you did not show a covenant with the Gentiles, nor did you show the terms of their covenant. What you just showed is that they are grafted into Israel and are made part of (not replacement of) the seed of Abraham. Again, Scripture teaches that Israel is His people and they will never cease to exist.

Ez. 37:24-28... That clearly says where the Messiah will be, who He is with and what He will require.

For the record, I do not recall ever subscribing to replacement theology or anything approaching it. I know that national Israel is the mia wife, and I’m totally ok with that.

But this^^ does not mean that

1. all Israel will be part of that bride, or
2. That to be part of Christ, I have to be part of Israel, or
3. That I have to get to Christ thru Israel. Christ doesnt have any concubines.

 

[PeteR]

Acts 15 shows in no uncertain terms that Gentile believers have a different very abbreviated set of rules than the Jews/Israel did.

You may want to reread v. 21.... the four rules are minimums that get them cleaned up for fellowship. ..

He is our covenant. Not the tribes.

No, He is the mediator of the covenant.

really dont know why this is a thing. Unless you think that only Israel can be His people? That somehow conversion to Israel/Judaism is required to have faith in and covenant with Christ?

I really dont know why this is a thing. Unless you think that only Israel can be His people? That somehow conversion to Israel/Judaism is required to have faith in and covenant with Christ?

Because God thinks its a thing! He says Israel is His people. Prophecy says He will restore Israel.. .. Christendom has tried to replace, ignore, forget, marginalize, etc Israel. God doesn't and hasn't. In fact, there are more prophecies about the restoration of Israel than about the coming of the Messiah... kinda important. Might want to figure out why!

 

[Verifyveritas76]

They exested simultaneously for centuries the earthly levitical priesthood is a copy of the melchiizedek heavenly. They don't both exist on earth I agree with that...

That is not at all what I’m saying.

The Melchizedek existed simultaneously in both heaven and earth until Numbers 16 at the family level and Joshua 10 at the whole earth level. Later, Certain men, like Joshua, Samuel, David, Solomon, Elijah and Elisha modeled it to a certain degree in very specific prophetic instances.

The Melchizedek is completely incompatible in practice with Torah, because Torah very clearly specifies lineage for priesthood and excludes anyone from priesthood, let alone high priest, who is not of Aarons line. The M Priesthood is a priesthood of the firstborn, ie fathers. When you become a father/husband, you are a candidate for the priesthood because it is then your responsibility to follow God and command your family after you. The L priesthood is a priesthood of the substitutes for the firstborn/fathers per Numbers 3 & 8. They are simply a shadow.

Under Torah, Christ can be neither priest nor High Priest due to his lineage, with no caveats that I can find, even though thats exactly what Hebrews says he is. Thats partially why he’s a high priest after the order of Melchizedek. The other reason is that he’s always been THE Melchizedek, from before the morning star/creation. He’s always been the Heavenly, now he is both the Heavenly Melchizedek and the Earthly Melchizedek.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

You may want to reread v. 21.... the four rules are minimums

so we’re on the same page here

that get them cleaned up for fellowship. ..

. . . . . And this is complete and utter . . . Eisegesis

No, He is the mediator of the covenant.

While this is true, it does not negate that He is the door to the covenant. He is the dath.

Because God thinks its a thing! He says Israel is His people. Prophecy says He will restore Israel.. .. Christendom has tried to replace, ignore, forget, marginalize, etc Israel. God doesn't and hasn't. In fact, there are more prophecies about the restoration of Israel than about the coming of the Messiah... kinda important. Might want to figure out why!

You’re arguing with yourself here. I am not a replacement theology guy. None of this proves that Gentiles have to be part of national or racial Israel to be in Christ. Kinda important. Might want to figure out why!

 

[The Revolting Man]

There are two parties mentioned in the new covenant in that passage.
As to Ezekiel 37. That entire chapter is a specific passage specifically regarding national Israel and the Trying to shoehorn everyone’s else into His covenant thru their house is conflating our covenant with Him with their covenant with Him.

Agreed. I think you may have misread the post. My point is that the Masoretic’s credibility with me is nonexistent now. This does not mean they changed everything, but certain topics that I know they jacked with, my default now is extreme caution. I cannot just accept it at face value whole heartedly.

I hate that it’s that way for me now but I can’t pretend otherwise.

I just ran across another instance the other day in Psalms 110:3 where they’ve changed it from God swearing verse 4 from before the morning star’s creation to the womb of the morning which massively degrades the importance of the origin of the Priesthood

Sorry, I did misread that.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Melchizadek is not a well enough known figure for us to build too much theology up around him.

 

[PeteR]

. . . . And this is complete and utter . . . Eisegesis

How so?

You’re arguing with yourself here. I am not a replacement theology guy. None of this proves that Gentiles have to be part of national or racial Israel to be in Christ. Kinda important. Might want to figure out why!

I've never argued that one must be part of Israel to be in Christ. What I've argued, consistently, is that if you are in Christ then you are part of Israel. A people with a real destiny that has a real past. Grafted in. Part of the house of Israel, specifically. Scripture bears this out along with the responsibility that brings.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

How so?

You know what eisegesis is. That perspective has to be read into the passage as this text in no way supports that. Neither does the other two instances referring back to it, nor the actions of Paul or the rejoicing of the affected churches following the letter. Not to mention the early church fathers perspective on it.

Complete and utter . . . Eisegesis

I've never argued that one must be part of Israel to be in Christ. What I've argued, consistently, is that if you are in Christ then you are part of Israel. A people with a real destiny that has a real past. Grafted in. Part of the house of Israel, specifically. Scripture bears this out along with the responsibility that brings.

You’ve got your analogy wrong and subsequently your theology is off. National and/or racial Israel is NOT the tree.

Are you really trying to say that believers are grafted into Christ’s family now thru a wife he gave a writing of divorce to? And who is not yet reconciled and restored?

Why not grafted into the house of Judah. At least she’s not dead to him ATM. Otherwise we’d have to wait till He fulfills Ezekiel 37 to have access to any of the benefits of being in his family!

From a poly family perspective, that’s like a man who has two wives, the first wife commits adultery, is warned multiple times and won’t quit so she’s given a writing of divorce and sent out and cut off. So she’s out of the picture. Which means no provision, protection or marital duties. Then other wives are brought into the family, but they have to wait for provision, protection and consumation until the first wife (who’s now divorced) gets her rebellious act together.

Am I missing something here? This is something even an idiot husband wouldn’t do, and no woman would join the family under these conditions.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Melchizadek is not a well enough known figure for us to build too much theology up around him.

There’s far more information about Melchizedek than the trinity.

 

[PeteR]

Are you really trying to say that believers are grafted into Christ’s family now thru a wife he gave a writing of divorce to? And who is not yet reconciled and restored?

Yes. You really should study the whole flow of Scriptures and the prophecies from beginning to end...

Matthew 15:24 and Romans 7:1-6 specifically address this. Pail is talking about a specific law.... and, clue, why in Romans 9 does he quote Hosea? What's that all about?

The prophetic picture begins in Genesis 32 and is specifically prophesied in Genesis 48... all the details are there. Yes, it's a poly relationship and the stiffnecked divorced woman is still stiffnecked. Until she's willing to obey the house rules, she's bot coming back in.

I can travel every detail and show what happens best... it's all there.

 

[Asforme&myhouse]

Beyond the four admonishments in Acts 15 the Apostles gave no command to be circumcised or to follow the ceremonial aspects of the Law. So, if it was required to avoid lawlessness the result of which is being cast into hell, then the Apostles mislead the gentiles.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Yes. You really should study the whole flow of Scriptures and the prophecies from beginning to end...

Matthew 15:24 and Romans 7:1-6 specifically address this. Pail is talking about a specific law.... and, clue, why in Romans 9 does he quote Hosea? What's that all about?

The prophetic picture begins in Genesis 32 and is specifically prophesied in Genesis 48... all the details are there. Yes, it's a poly relationship and the stiffnecked divorced woman is still stiffnecked. Until she's willing to obey the house rules, she's bot coming back in.

I can travel every detail and show what happens best... it's all there.

I’ll wait.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Romans 9 doesn’t help your case much

Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.

What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
ButIsrael, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness

I’m still waiting to see where we are grafted into national Israel

 

[Slumberfreeze]

I was under the impression that circumcision was nothing and that uncircumcision was nothing.

 

[PeteR]

Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.

Who is 'not My people' that are later called 'My people?' If you'll read Hosea 1&2 you'll see exactly who Paul is referring to when he uses the term 'Gentiles.'

There are dozens of prophecies concerning the restoration and regathering of the house of Israel, formerly divorced and 'not My people.' There is no body of prophecies concerning Gentiles apart from them coming with the house of Israel.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Who is 'not My people' that are later called 'My people?' If you'll read Hosea 1&2 you'll see exactly who Paul is referring to when he uses the term 'Gentiles.'

There are dozens of prophecies concerning the restoration and regathering of the house of Israel, formerly divorced and 'not My people.' There is no body of prophecies concerning Gentiles apart from them coming with the house of Israel.

You have yet to show where they are grafted into national Israel. Take your time. I’ll wait.

 

[PeteR]

@Verifyveritas76 , I said,

There are two parties in the new covenant. Either, you fit in house of Israel or house of Judah. There is no Gentile group.. ..

Paul may use the term Gentiles, but only as one's former state. You are now a member of the Commonwealth of Israel. He understood the mystery of the gospel... the divorced house of Israel could return! That's why he quotes Jeremiah, Hosea, Amos, etc... same reason James and Peter quote them.

You answered,

There are two parties mentioned in the new covenant in that passage.
As to Ezekiel 37. That entire chapter is a specific passage specifically regarding national Israel and the Trying to shoehorn everyone’s else into His covenant thru their house is conflating our covenant with Him with their covenant with Him.

I asked,

So, please show me where the covenant with the Gentiles is recorded and what are the terms?

While you're at it, what are the terms for the new covenant?

You did not answer that, rather, listed a couple examples of salvation for a non-Jew, something I do not disagree with.

The original question was how the 'Gentiles' fit in. I do not see any covenant with them. Scripture consistently only discusses one covenant and two parties. Therefore, we must be part of one or the other. I can show how we are part of the house of Israel. You got empty hands a red herring so far. I'm pretty sure in this thread and consistently throughout this forum, I have maintained salvation through Messiah, but over and over I've consistently said that we are part of the house of Israel.

There are no prophecies for any people other than Israel. There is no covenant and no terms for any other people. Everything, and I mean everything points to the restoration of kol Israel!! Both houses.

 

[Cap]

Why would YHVH purposefully make it vague? To try and cause us to sin? If His Torah is perfect, and attainable {Attainable: within reach, possible, gain, achieve} (per Psalm 19 and Deut. 30), then it is very clear as to how to keep His commandments... Saying that the Torah is vague is a lame excuse. Perhaps you should start in Exodus 16 and 20 for the Sabbath, Leviticus 23 for the Feasts, and Leviticus 11 for the clean and unclean laws. Read that and let me know how "vague" His commands are.

You are correct, it's very clear to me how I'm to live my life. I have no other conviction. I am following the Law as I believe the Holy Spirit is guiding me to follow the Law. So I change my position, I am a Torah follower.

I follow Christ. I follow the the feasts the way I believe them to be followed. I observe the Sabbath as I believe to be correct. I eat what I believe to be clean. So I AM a Torah follower.

Tell me I'm not.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

@PeteR. You have repeatedly asserted that there are only two houses in the covenant, and yet when I show people who are obviously accepted by Christ, yet do not conform to the covenants for those houses, there is no biblical explanation for how that can be. No debunking or refuting of those points. Not to mention addressing Isaiah 65. I said, Behold me, behold me to a nation that was not called by my name. Also referred to in Romans 10:19-21. As well as chapter 11 which very specifically says that the Gentiles are grafted into the tree as branches, not grafted into Israel which are the removed branches that will be grafted back in to the tree. Very significant. Nor any address to the Romans 9 passages I pointed out, or the Ephesians 2.

I completely agree that both those houses will have their covenant renewed at some point, though that may not look like anything we have expected it to look like.

Unless you’ve got some better arguments hiding up your sleeve somewhere, or some scripture somewhere that specifically states that every believer is shoehorned into national Israels covenant, you have completely failed to prove your point.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

I’ve been going back thru the New Testament to look specifically for this idea of a separate Gentile covenant.

Rather what I’ve found is that Christs covenant is one that both national Israel and Gentiles are shoehorned into.

Consider 1 Corinthians 10:32. Give none offense, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God. In this passage, Paul is making a distinct difference between Jew and Gentile and the church of God. As in the church of God is neither Jew or Gentile!
In chapter 12, Paul states that we are all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free, we are all baptized into one Spirit.

The Jews dont get to accept Christ and reject the Lords Supper. And that involves eating his flesh and drinking his blood as a Passover Feast. Artos bread, no less. Not azumos. And this brings me to the covenant that is not exclusively Gentile, but the Gentiles are completely welcome in it, as are Jews, Israel, Greeks and Barbarians and anyone who will covenant with Him.

1 Corinthians 11:25. .. . . This cup is the new testament (new covenant) in my blood. Completely unTorah! Completely unIsrael/Judah covenant! And yet they are not excluded but are welcomed!

12:27. Now ye are the body of Christ [not the tribe of Israel] and members in particular.