Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: editor-surveyor
You might want to consider the differences between the old covenant and the new.

For instance, Jesus could not be a priest under the Law of Moses. He was from the wrong tribe. The Jews should've recognized this, since the Messiah was prophesied to come from Judah and not Levi, and His priesthood would be from the order of Melchizedek and not Aaron.

His priesthood is also superior to the Levitical one, as the new covenant is superior to the old one:

"But now hath he obtained a ministry the more excellent, by so much as he is also the mediator of a better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second." (Hebrews 8:6-7)

"In that he saith, A new covenant he hath made the first old. But that which is becoming old and waxeth aged is nigh unto vanishing away." (8:16)

All of this agrees perfectly with Paul's elaboration of the gospel in Romans. For instance:

"And for this cause he is the mediator of a new covenant, that a death having taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first covenant, they that have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance." (Heb. 9:15)

And further on the inadequacy of the Law of Moses:

"For the law having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things, can never with the same sacrifices year by year, which they offer continually, make perfect them that draw nigh. Else would they not have ceased to be offered? because the worshippers, having been once cleansed, would have had no more consciousness of sins. But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance made of sins year by year. For it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins." (Heb. 10:1-4)

If you're familiar with the Law of Moses, a study of Hebrews will be very profitable, since you'll quickly understand the "inferior vs. superior" comparisons with which the author makes his case to stop clinging to the old covenant and embrace the new.
37 posted on 05/21/2014 1:09:11 PM PDT by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: LearsFool

The boilerplate discussion that you inject has nothing to do with the original point: Torah remains the total framework of the Kingdom of Yehova. It will remain as such until all things are accomplished.

Yeshua’s perfect sacrifice is what has perfected Torah.

Now all of those that are his have Torah written on their hearts. Read John’s first epistle and see if you can find anything but Torah within it. Then read Peter’s first epistle and see when salvation will be had by all of his elect at once. Then read Yeshua’s words in Matthew 24:13, and 29-31.

The only difference between the old covenant and the renewed covenant is the perfection of the sacrifice.


38 posted on 05/21/2014 4:21:11 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson