10 comments on “The weakness and purpose of the old covenant

  1. Don’t you find it interesting that God said via Ezekial 44:9 concerning the Temple that no one would be allowed to enter unless they are circumcised both in the flesh and the heart. So when God says ‘I Am and I change not.’ Mal 3:6 What makes us think that via Paul that God suddenly changed and discarded His Word?

    Like

  2. “Don’t you find it interesting that God said via Ezekial 44:9 concerning the Temple that no one would be allowed to enter unless they are circumcised both in the flesh and the heart.”

    I do find it interesting! The temple, of course, belonged to that old covenant administration that Ezekiel and his audience were still a part of. That covenant, through types and shadows, pointed to Christ.

    “So when God says ‘I Am and I change not.’ Mal 3:6 What makes us think that via Paul that God suddenly changed and discarded His Word?”

    I don’t think he did. I also do not think physical circumcision plays a part in anyone’s salvation or entrance into heaven. Christ is our circumcision. See Colossians 2 and Philippians 3.

    Like

  3. Now that brings up another question. Yahshua commanded His followers to do the Law of Moses, and seeing as how circumcision is an integral part of the Law , then why do Christians think it is now unnecessary? I’ve heard many say that ‘well he said that before the cross, but the cross changed everything.’ But how can that be when Yahshua also said that His words would never pass away. Also how can Christians enter the New Covenant which is with the House of Israel if they don’t conform to the terms of the Covenant, which is the Law.? It would seem they are missing the vast bulk of what God has to give them. It seems as though Christianity has been stuck for a couple thousand years never having progressed much beyond an initial salvation message.

    Like

  4. Did you read the verses and commentary at the link? Keach was not against God’s law. He recognized – according to Scripture – that the ceremonial laws given to Israel were foreshadowing Christ. To return to them would be to reject him. See the Epistle to the Hebrews.

    Like

  5. I realize what what was said but if Yahshua commanded His followers to keep and do the Law of Moses then it would be rejection of Yahshua to forsake the Law and follow another. I mean all authority in heaven and earth is given to Yahshua, therefore what Yahshua taught His disciples should have infinitely more authority. When God testified of His Son He said ‘this is my beloved Son ‘hear and obey Him.’ So God commands obedience to Yahshua and Yahshua said ‘if you love Me obey me.’ So if another comes and contradicts Him and says ‘follow me’ but that one doesn’t obey the commands of Yahshua then where is the Christian left?
    So it would be rather hypocritical on Yahshua’s part to command his followers to do the Law of Moses if doing the Law of Moses is tantamount to rejecting Him.

    Like

  6. Jer 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
    You will never find where Yahshua nor his disciples ever offered up a blood sacrifice. As a matter of fact several of the Prophets condemned blood sacrifice.
    So no I don’t, but where did Yahshua ever say ‘forsake the law and you will live’? Or that it is now unnecessary? I recall a similar scene in the Garden of Eden, ‘Yea hath God said?’

    Like

  7. Putting aside for the moment the fact that you are outside the bounds of all orthodox Christianity by your rejection of Paul’s epistles, are you arguing that we must keep “the law” to merit eternal life, or out of obligation and thanksgiving.

    Also, don’t put words in my mouth. That sounds familiar, too.

    Like

  8. I wonder, what part of ‘keep the Commandments and live’ do people not understand? Out of obligation or thanksgiving? Yahshua said if you love Me keep my Commandments.
    But yes I reject Paul, I find him completely irrelevant and for many he has replaced the Holy Spirit, in that Christianity assumes that Paul is true. But Yahshua said that Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth and He will lead and guide us into all truth and understanding. Therefore Paul is quite superfluous.

    But if you are completely confident in Paul then come on over to truthseekers.co.za

    Like

  9. Let’s hope your righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees, then.

    I do not reject Paul or the rest of the Spirit-inspired apostolic writings, none of which contradict Christ or the Old Testament in the slightest.

    I reject your cult.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s