Incoming fire!
Who is now following God?
Let’s see your permit from the county to go all Dahmer on your lambs bulls goats and doves if you love the old covenant so much.
And let’s take a look in your fridge and closet to see if you’re serious about it.
Don’t be fooled into thinking God has stopped keeping his promises to Abraham and his descendants just because the main one has been fulfilled by Christ.
There is no room for anti-semitism in the gospel.
The “new” of it: We do not live exclusively by rules (the “old” of it) - faith was being swept aside, and Jesus showed up to correct the course heading.
Saving for later.
I don't like being referred to as a "Messianic Jew", even though I know that is technically correct.
I did not come to the Christian faith by way of studying Judaism, and I don't like the implication that
I'm in a separate category from Gentile Christians. Didn't Saint Paul say "neither Jew nor Greek"?
It’s what I have been saying all along and the ignorance among today’s evangelicals on this subject is stunning.
To their Credit, Catholics still teach the 10 commandments, ALL 10, because they don’t accept the dual covenant heresy. And it is a heresy. The Catechism has a whole section on the 10 commandments including the Sabbath! And to keep it.
The only difference is they have traditionally taught the papacy had the power and authority to change the weekly holy day from the seventh to the first day.
Dual Covenant heresy came about in part because today’s evangelicals know Sunday keeping isn’t in the Bible. So they bought this heresy......OT is law, NT is grace. No law, meaning no Sabbath....just grace.
Until of course you try to take their car or sleep with their wives....then there is law again.
In the final analysis, one will either side with the papacy and keep Sunday....or with the Seventh day Adventist message and keep the Bible Sabbath. In the end there will be no other option. The Mark of the Beast will concern God’s law. Just as a decree issued in Daniel’s day concerned God’s law. Daniel 6:5
Never tinker with God’s holy things.....and the weekly Sabbath is a holy thing that God made holy. And he made it for man. Genesis 2:1 and 2......and Mark 2:27.
At least the Catholics are not fooled by this dual covenant heresy......Evangelicals have been snookered hook line and sinker.
“Opposed to this, the Catholic Faith teaches that the Old Law — itself good, holy, and of divine origin — was a preparation for the New, and that the New Law superceded and fulfilled the Old.”
That is the position of many Protestants as well. Jesus was the fulfillment of the Law.
To those who want to look further into this question, but want a non-Catholic-Christian source, may I suggest reading The Gospel of the Kingdom by Philip Mauro.
I'm not criticizing the article that was posted at all (I agree with it), but I recognize that some people who are not Catholic may prefer additional, non-Catholic, sources.
Dispensationalism, and the Scofield Reference Bible, are a modern invention and are heresy to any Christian.
“For the Lord will not cast off His people, nor will He forsake His inheritance.” (Psalm 94:14)
“I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.”
(Romans 9:2-5)
“As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake; but as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”
(Romans 11:28–29)
“And so all Israel will be saved…” (Romans 11:26)
I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew.
(Romans 11:1-2)
Much more,,,,,
In the simplest of terms,
1. The Catholic Church and some other denominations recognize the continuing covenantal status of the Jewish people on the basis of all the scriptural teachings (some of which are set forth above), but nevertheless the Catholic Church teaches that the Jewish people are saved by virtue of God’s love/ mercy (this is consistent with Jewish understanding) — as expressed via Jesus (there is, therefore, but one covenant which includes both Christian’s and Jews). The Catholic Church also teaches that rejecting the Jewish covental status is both error —as both testaments teach (see above).
2. Some churches teach that there are two salvation covenants, the Jewish covenant(s) (which is “irrevocable” per both the OT/Hebrew Scriptures and the NT/ Greek Scriptures, as above) and a new covenant for Christians via Jesus). This takes the “mystery” out of the Catholic understanding of one covenant including both Jewish and Christian peoples. As a practical result, both approaches have both faith communities “saved,” just via slightest different interpretations.
3. A third understanding is to see the Christian salvation as arising via the Biblical promise to the people of Israel (which include both the Jewish people and those “grafted in” as per Paul — by virtue of God deeming them to be a part of His promised ingathering of exiled Israel. This understanding builds on how the term People of Israel is used in the Bible, and history.
4 There are still some churches which teach various versions of “replacement” or “supercessionist” theology, whereby they view themselves as saved but not the Jewish people (or, usually, anybody else). This can be supported via a selected excepting of passages such as the well- known John 3:16. (But it requires ignoring many other Biblical teachings from Genesis through at least Saint Paul.)
Thus, several understandings. And we haven’t even mentioned British Israelism or the LDS church or several more understandings.
So, anyone who wants to can throw their tomatoes in just about any direction s/he wishes. As for me, I’m ducking out now. I can’t afford another cleaners bill
Smiles smiles.
The New Covenant bears and takes up into it by recapitulation (Eph 1:10) all the former promises to Abraham and Israel but it does not allow for a dual-covenant understanding of the recapitulation in Christ. The Mosaic covenant has become “obsolete” (cf. Hebrews 8:13) and the New Covenant is superior and determinative of God’s Israel. The Mosaic covenant was “provisional” and “pedagogical” (cf. CCC #122) and “broken” (Jeremiah 31:32).
Yes, and expounded upon here, by the grace of God. Law and Grace
However, related to the heresy of dual covenant theology is the error Catholicism holds to, that of supersessionism/replacement theology, at least one version of it, and thus she rejects the literal 1,000 reign of the Lord Jesus, (Revelation 20:4; Dan. 7:9, 18, 22, 27; Mt. 19:28; Luke 22:30; 1 Co. 6:2, 3) which influenced its aversion to affirming the modern state of Israel, even though Roman Catholicism affirms a future conversion of all Jews.
Ping