The new testament is wrong. Abram heard the LORD and obeyed him:
Gen 12: 4So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.
G-d then first tells Abram of the promise.
7And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him. 8And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto the LORD, and called upon the name of the LORD.
So, Abram heard the LORD then acted upon the words of the LORD by works! He built an altar and offered sacrifices! He traveled to Egypt and back and then:
Gen 13: 18Then Abram removed his tent, and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron, and built there an altar unto the LORD.
A second altar unto the LORD and offered scrifices! It isnt until Genesis 15, when G-d repeats His promise to Abram that he states his belief in the promise and it is accounted to Abram as righteousness. CLEARLY, Abram had already believed in G-d and had performed many works including two sacrficial altars! The NT is just wrong.
the Covenant of Moses, faith was to be demonstrated by obedience to the Law.
But the obdedience is driven by love of G-d and His word. Our model is King David. Psalm 119, 176 verses (longest in the whole bible) of David extoling the virtues and love of the law. To Paul a curse, to David a delight! I'll take David over Paul any day of the week. Notice Davids confession of murder to nathan is forgiven on the spot. No blood sacrifice. In all of scripture, there is not one recorded event of someone sinning intentionally and offering an animal sacrifice for forgiveness! Not one.
through the High Priest and the Temple rituals, served as a type of mediator between Israel and God.
Not really, that is only a process prescribed by G-d only when there is a temple. G-d told the people there would be times when the people would not have a temple or preist or king.
Hosea 3:4For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:
Therefore the people had always been able to obtain forgiveness DIRECTLY through G-d. Sacrifices are primarily for unintentional sin. Only about 6 intentional sins are covered by animal sacrifice. And blood sacrifice was not required. (Lev 5:11) They were based on a sliding scale of means, the last being flour. No blood, just flour.
The people of Nineveh (among many other examples) recieved atonement without sacrifice.
if a Jew had faith, he would follow the Law, and if he did not follow the Law, he had not faith.
Not exactly. Many people have faith in G-d but not follow the law. The Israelites had problems chasing after other gods (and had little or no faith) and during 2nd temple times, problems getting along with each other, showing love, mercy and justice to each other but they still had some faith in G-d, just not a strong active faith. But in all cases in all times, there has been a holy remnant.
Now, in the Old Testament, God did promise a New Covenant to the people of Israel, which we believe has been established. If our belief is correct, the mediation of Christ begins with the inception of this New Covenant, which began at Christ’s death.
This new covenant A) Has not occurred yet and B) Is to the house of Israel and Judah. Not the Gentiles, although they will be included in the end of days.
Jer 31:31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
33But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
When the new covenant comes, all will know G-d. That hasnt happened yet. Ezekiel says almost the same thing.
And I shall give them one heart, and shall put a new spirit within them. And I shall take the heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances, and do them. Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God. Ezekiel 11:19-20
And Isaiah too:And many peoples shall come, and say: "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths," for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:3
Since, Jesus did not A) Become the King of Judah or Israel, B) Did not bring knowlege of G-d from the least to the greatest and C) rebuild the temple and retore sacrifices (Ezk 43/44) There is no New Covenant yet. This will occur in the Messianic era by the Jewish Messiah. Soon!
“The new testament is wrong. Abram heard the LORD and obeyed him”
Yes, but there can be no obedience without faith, only a shadow of obedience. Obedience without faith is dead, and faith without obedience is not truly faith.
“So, Abram heard the LORD then acted upon the words of the LORD by works!... It isnt until Genesis 15, when G-d repeats His promise to Abram that he states his belief in the promise and it is accounted to Abram as righteousness.”
Yes, but the point Paul was making is that the Lord had already accounted Abram a righteous man, and blessed him, before he did any works of obedience. The only thing which Abram had done at that point was harken to the voice of the Lord, which was an act of faith, not obedience.
Does the Lord bless the wicked?
Proverbs 3:33
“The LORD curses the house of wicked people, but he blesses the home of righteous people.”
If the Lord had not counted Abram as righteous before Genesis 15, there would have been no blessing, and no promise.
“’the Covenant of Moses, faith was to be demonstrated by obedience to the Law.’
But the obdedience is driven by love of G-d and His word.”
Love of God and his Word, comes from faith, so I think we’re just arguing semantics here. Does the faithless man love God?
“To Paul a curse, to David a delight! I’ll take David over Paul any day of the week.”
Paul was not saying the Law was a curse, but that disobedience to the Law carried a curse. When he said “the curse of the Law”, he clearly refers to the associated curses of disobedience, not the Law itself. Paul also extolled the virtues of the Law:
Romans 7:12
“Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.”
“In all of scripture, there is not one recorded event of someone sinning intentionally and offering an animal sacrifice for forgiveness! Not one.”
Not for forgiveness, but for atonement, of course blood sacrifice was required. Christ removes the necessity of atonement through sacrifice, once and for all. Forgiveness is given, not in exchange for a sacrifice (for who can bargain with the Lord?), but freely given by God by his mercy.
“Not really, that is only a process prescribed by G-d only when there is a temple. G-d told the people there would be times when the people would not have a temple or preist or king.”
There were High Priests, even before the temple, for didn’t Aaron serve the same function? Regardless, though, as I said it was a “type” of mediator, which means it was a thing which foreshadowed what was to come. During the Old Covenant, the mediation of Christ could not have been effective, since he had not yet performed the work necessary for his exaltation. Yet, God provided Israel with rituals which symbolically represented the work of the Mediator that was to come. The purpose was not to serve as an actual mediator, but to instruct them, and later, to serve as testament that God’s plan was set from the beginning.
G-d told the people there would be times when the people would not have a temple or preist or king.
Hosea 3:4For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim:
Therefore the people had always been able to obtain forgiveness DIRECTLY through G-d.”
You didn’t post the final verses of that quote (Hos 3:5-6):
“5 Afterward the Israelites will return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They will come trembling to the LORD and to his blessings in the last days”
The last 2 verses show that while the Israelites are living many days without these things, it is not until the last days that they return to seek the Lord and their king, and recieve his blessings. What Hosea describes is the results of the curse that God placed on Israel for her disobedience, not evidence that the curse was of no effect.
“The people of Nineveh (among many other examples) recieved atonement without sacrifice.”
The people of Ninevah were not a part of the Covenant, so how the Lord dealt with them is not relevant to how the Lord dealt with those under the Covenant.
“Many people have faith in G-d but not follow the law. The Israelites had problems chasing after other gods (and had little or no faith) and during 2nd temple times, problems getting along with each other, showing love, mercy and justice to each other but they still had some faith in G-d, just not a strong active faith. But in all cases in all times, there has been a holy remnant.”
It is true, that the Lord will always provide that there is a holy remnant among his people, but this does not mean that the rest of Israel is faithful, when they are clearly not. Is a wife faithful to her husband if she commits adultery? Clearly not, so when Israel was whoring after other Gods, she was not faithful, despite the fact that the Lord, through his mercy, provided a faithful remnant within her. If they offered worship in the Temple, and at the same time, offered worship to other Gods after the manner of the pagans, then the worship they offered to God was done in disobedience. They were, so to speak, only going through the motions.
“Since, Jesus did not A) Become the King of Judah or Israel, B) Did not bring knowlege of G-d from the least to the greatest and C) rebuild the temple and retore sacrifices (Ezk 43/44) There is no New Covenant yet. This will occur in the Messianic era by the Jewish Messiah. Soon!”
The prophecies you cite do refer to the New Covenant that the Messiah would institute, however, they do not say that all these things will be accomplished instantly. They do not say, the Messiah will come, and as soon as he appears, all these things will happen. There is, however, a more specific timetable for some of the events concerning the Messiah, which you did not refer to.
Daniel 9:24-27
“24Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”
Now, this prophecy actually provides a timeline of events, which can be pinpointed in history, and the coming of the Messiah is included in this timeline. We know when the command to rebuild was given, and we know when the city and the sanctuary was destroyed. The Messiah was prophecied to come, and to be “cut off”, in the time between these two events, which is exactly the period in which we see the appearance of Jesus, and his death.
Now, you can argue that this prophecy doesn’t prove Jesus is the Messiah, but how can you argue that this prophecy doesn’t prove the Messiah has already come? If he already has come, and the work that is prophecied to be performed by the Messiah is not all evident, then it only stands to reason that the Messiah would not complete all of his work instantaneously.