Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
Gregory Matthews

Passover & Christianity

Recommended Posts

The Wanderer
1 hour ago, Ron Amnsn said:

I haven't been able to find the passage you referenced as Psalms 11:7-8, but I'm quite certain that the Hebrew word that is translated as "the law" is not the same Hebrew word that is translated as "Ten Commandments".  The "law"  is most likely the Hebrew word "Torah", which usually refers to all of God's instructions found in the Books of Moses. 

Sorry, that was a typo. It should be Psalms 111:7-8 and the word "law" is not in those two verses.

Psa 111:7  The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure.
Psa 111:8  They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.

"All His commandments" does not refer to the ones which looked forward to the cross, and Jesus death. Now that Calvary has happened, those laws (call them what you will) are not needed, they do not even fit the original purpose for which they were given.

Quote

 

The Ten Commandments represent the ONLY part of divine revelation given directly by God Himself without any assistance of any human being. The Deacalogue was directly spoken by The Audible Word Of God, and its precepts were chiselled into tablets of stone by the finger of God which indicates their value and their perpetuity.

Moses' law was the temporary, ceremonial law of The Old Testament. It regulated the priesthood, sacrifices, ritual meat & drink offerings, etc...all of which served only to foreshadow the cross. This law of Moses was added only "until the seed shall come" which was Christ Jesus. (Gal 3:16-19). The ritual and ceremonial of Moses' law always points forward to Christs' sacrifice upon the cross.  When Jesus died Moses' law came to an end, it is now not necessary to point forward to the cross because it has already happened, but those Ten Commandments ( "the law of The Lord Thy God" ) stand solid and fast together and forever. (Psalms 111:7-8).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
On 4/27/2018 at 12:02 AM, The Wanderer said:

Mat 5:17  Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy but to fulfill.
Mat 5:18  For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the Law until all is fulfilled.

The writer of Hebrews says:

Hebrews 7:12 "For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law." (NKJ)

The LAW was changed - in only one thing - the priesthood (from Levi/Aaron BACK to "the firstborn"). 

Either you declare the Letter to the Hebrews uninspired, OR all was "fulfilled" when Christ died and rose again.  

OR - I suppose you could argue that Christ did not really say the words of Matthew 5:18. 

Acts 3:18 "But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled." (NKJ)

Luke 24:44 Then He said to them, "These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me." (NKJ)

On one side of the argument, you have the folks who say that nothing can "change" until heaven and earth pass away.

On the other side, you have the folks (like me) who believe everything WAS FULFILLED that was "written in the Law".  Christ FULFILLED the Law.  The Law was FULFILLED. 

(I believe that) Christ was speaking (in Matthew 5:18) of those prophecies concerning things He would fulfill during His time spent on this earth.  He was not speaking of those things He would fulfill during the next age and onwards.  If He was, that would mean that the Law will NEVER be changed.  It would mean that the Letter to the Hebrews was not inspired, and the teachings of that author were wrong and misleading. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer

Maybe it would be worth looking at what is intended by the use of the word fulfilled? It cannot be the case where one scripture cancels out another? Maybe there is something we have missed here so far? The upper case and bolding of a word (in this case fulfilled) usually means there is more to the story

Edited by The Wanderer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
On 4/28/2018 at 9:55 PM, The Wanderer said:

Sorry, that was a typo. It should be Psalms 111:7-8 and the word "law" is not in those two verses.

Psa 111:7  The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure.
Psa 111:8  They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.

Thanks.  You're right, the word "Law" or "Torah" is not found in these verses. 

The word translated in the KJV as "commandments" in verse 7 is the Hebrew word piqqud (H6490), which appears only in Psalms.  The KJV translates piqqud as "precepts" in most places, as do other English versions.  It doesn't seem to refer specifically to the "ten commandments", but rather to all instructions mandated or appointed by God.

The translators of the Septuagint translated piqqud (commandments) in Psalm 111:7 as the plural form of the Greek word entole (G1785).  The Greek translators also used exactly that same form of entole in the last verse of Leviticus where it summarizes the preceding instructions-- "These are the commandments, which the LORD commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai." (KJV)   It is significant that the book of Leviticus contains many instructions from God that might be classified as "ceremonial law" (if that were a valid category) but the "ten commandments" are not listed in Leviticus.  So we know from the summary at the end of Leviticus that Greek-speaking Jews did not understand the word entole as a word that designated the "ten commandments".  Rather, entole is used for the kind of instructions from God that are found in Leviticus.  

In the New Testament wherever the KJV uses the word "commandments" it is almost always translated from a form of that same Greek word entole.  So it is highly unlikely that the word "commandments" in the New Testament refers specifically to the "ten commandments" or to the "two greatest commandments" since that is not how entole was used in the Old Testament that Greek-speaking people had already been using for more than a century by the time the New Testament was written.

If the New Testament authors had wanted to refer specifically to the "ten commandments" spoken by God from Mt. Sinai, the Scriptures already contained a phrase for that purpose in both the Hebrew Scriptures and the Greek translation of the Scriptures.  In Hebrew the phrase is "ha debarim seret" (literally "the words ten" or "the utterances ten").  In Greek it is "tous deka logous" (literally "the ten words").  Those terms could have been used by any of the Bible authors if they had wanted to single out just the "ten commandments" instead of referring to all of God's commands as found in Scripture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn

I said I would respond to the rest of this message:

On 4/18/2018 at 12:40 PM, The Wanderer said:

As we discussed above, it would appear that you also "exclude" many of what you alledge to be 613 "laws" yet you defended yourself by stating that what you personally believe and practice regarding the ten commandments is not the subject of this thread and yet, you are saying here that it is the subject of this thread what I believe and practice regarding the ten commandments. This goes both ways. You know full-well that you yourself do not and cannot and need not keep all 613 laws, and there is a reason for that. Would you care to tell us what it is, and give us scripture evidence for your reasoning? ( Also,  i do seriously question the number 613).

In my opinion, the topic we have been discussing is whether or not God's instructions in the Books of Moses (eg. commemorating Passover) are still something that God expects the followers of Jesus to pay attention to.   The actual answer to that question is determined by God and by what He has revealed in Scripture, not by what you or I believe, nor by what you or I practice.  What we practice does reflect what we believe, and what we believe influences what we tell other people about God's expectations.

I have been asking questions about some of the things you have written in this thread regarding the topic of this thread.  Many of my questions have not been answered.  Nevertheless I will attempt to answer the questions you ask me.

I do know full-well that I myself do not and cannot keep all the 600+ laws in the Books of Moses.  There are Scriptural reasons for that.  For some of those same reasons Jesus himself did not and could not keep all of the 600+ laws in the Books of Moses, yet was without sin, even though he lived most of his earthly life during the time period before Messiah died.

  • Many of the instructions in the Books of Moses pertain to specific people or to specific groups of people.
    For example, since Jesus was not a descendant of Aaron he could not be a priest at the earthly temple (Hebrews 8:4), so the instructions of Torah that were given to the Priests were not applicable to Jesus.  It would have been contrary to the Law for Jesus to do the things specified in the Law to be done only by the Levitical Priests.  Other parts of God's Law of Moses pertain to kings, farmers, soldiers, women, men, land owners, land purchasers, slaves, etc.  A totally righteous person like Jesus was not expected (by Law) to follow the instructions that were given to specific groups of which he was not a member.
  • Some of the instructions given by God in the Books of Moses could be done only in specific circumstances.
    For example, it would have been contrary to the Law for Jesus to stone the woman caught in adultery (John 8:3).  The Law specifies that when people are adulterous, both the man and the woman should be put to death.  It also specifies that two or three witnesses must testify, and that their testimony must be weighed by someone authorized to judge such cases.  A totally righteous person like Jesus was not expected (by Law) to participate in activities that did not comply with the Law.
  • Some of the instructions given by God were specific to people living within the Land that was given as an inheritance to Israel as promised to Abraham.
    For example, the instructions regarding returning a purchased field at the year of Jubilee pertained to the Land that was part of the inheritance given to the tribes of Israel.  If you tried to apply that law outside the Promised Land, who would you return the land to?
    Other laws that may pertain only to the people living in the promised land are given in the Law with phrases like, "When you come into the land" (Leviticus 23:10)   A righteous person like the prophet Daniel was not expected to follow in exile the instructions that pertained to people living within the Land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wanderer
On 4/28/2018 at 9:26 PM, Ron Amnsn said:

Where does Scripture teach that the location of these words indicates anything about perpetuity?

The commandments are the work of God's hands:

Quote

Psa 111:7  The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure.

And these commandments were written on two stone tablets by the finger of God:

Quote

Exo_31:18  And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.
Deu_9:10  And the LORD delivered unto me two tables of stone written with the finger of God; and on them was written according to all the words, which the LORD spake with you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly.

Despite the differences pointed out to you in scripture, you continue to say that I am "not answering" your questions. I would also add that your last post above is so confusing, its impossible to understand anything about the law from it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
On 4/29/2018 at 9:21 AM, 8thdaypriest said:

Hebrews 7:12 "For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law." (NKJ)

The LAW was changed - in only one thing - the priesthood (from Levi/Aaron BACK to "the firstborn"). 

Either you declare the Letter to the Hebrews uninspired, OR all was "fulfilled" when Christ died and rose again.  

Or perhaps your interpretation of Hebrews 7:12 is wrong.  The Greek word in that verse that is translated as "changed" and "change" has as it's primary connotation a change of location.  Verses 13 and 14 explain what it was in the Law of Moses that didn't match the priesthood of Jesus.  And Hebrews 8:4 confirms that the location of Jesus is vital to his priesthood because the Law that governed the earthly priesthood had not changed at the time Hebrews was written:
Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. " (Hebrews 8:4)

A change of location often includes a change of jurisdiction.  In my home city the speed limit in school zones is 30km/h, but when I'm in certain states in the US I can legally drive faster than 30km/h in a school zone.  My change of location doesn't change the speed limit law in my home city, but it does change which body of law has jurisdiction over my driving.  Such a "change of law" doesn't actually make any change to any law at all-- my change of location simply changes the body of law that has jurisdiction over my driving.  That's the kind of "change of law" that Hebrews 7:12 is talking about. 

 

On 4/29/2018 at 9:21 AM, 8thdaypriest said:

OR - I suppose you could argue that Christ did not really say the words of Matthew 5:18. 

Acts 3:18 "But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled." (NKJ)

Luke 24:44 Then He said to them, "These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me." (NKJ)

On one side of the argument, you have the folks who say that nothing can "change" until heaven and earth pass away.

On the other side, you have the folks (like me) who believe everything WAS FULFILLED that was "written in the Law".  Christ FULFILLED the Law.  The Law was FULFILLED. 

(I believe that) Christ was speaking (in Matthew 5:18) of those prophecies concerning things He would fulfill during His time spent on this earth.  He was not speaking of those things He would fulfill during the next age and onwards.  If He was, that would mean that the Law will NEVER be changed.  It would mean that the Letter to the Hebrews was not inspired, and the teachings of that author were wrong and misleading. 

There is no contradiction between what Hebrews 7:12 says and what Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-19. 

The verses you quote above are talking about different things being fulfilled at different times, and both verses are talking about something different than what Jesus said in Matthew 5.

  • Acts 3:18 says that everything God foretold through the prophets regarding the suffering of Messiah has been fulfilled. 
  • In Luke 24:44 Jesus confirmed that everything foretold about Messiah in the Law, Prophets and Psalms must be fulfilled.  Some things foretold about Messiah have not yet been fulfilled but they will be.
  • But in Matthew 5:18 Jesus is talking the strokes of the Law not changing until everything foretold (about everything) in the Law and the Prophets has been accomplished and heaven and earth have passed away. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
47 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

The commandments are the work of God's hands:

Right.  But that doesn't answer my question, does it?  Where in Scripture does it say that perpetuity of the Word of God is dependent on location or method of recording?

The "commandments" referred to in the last verse of Leviticus are also God's work, even though they were not written on stone.

Job 34:19 says that princes, the rich, and the poor are the work of God's hands.  Does that convey perpetuity on those people?

Isaiah 29:22 says that the children of Jacob are the work of God's hands. Does that convey perpetuity on them?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
1 hour ago, The Wanderer said:

And these commandments were written on two stone tablets by the finger of God:

You are assuming an equivalency that seems to work in English, but doesn't work in Hebrew or Greek.  You are assuming that because a Hebrew word in Psalm 111:7 has been translated into English as "commandment" that it is talking specifically about the "ten commandments" and not about all the other commandments that God gave to Israel, such as the commandments written in Leviticus and referred to in the last verse of Leviticus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
4 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

The verses you quote above are talking about different things being fulfilled at different times, and both verses are talking about something different than what Jesus said in Matthew 5.

  • Acts 3:18 says that everything God foretold through the prophets regarding the suffering of Messiah has been fulfilled. 
  • In Luke 24:44 Jesus confirmed that everything foretold about Messiah in the Law, Prophets and Psalms must be fulfilled.  Some things foretold about Messiah have not yet been fulfilled but they will be.
  • But in Matthew 5:18 Jesus is talking the strokes of the Law not changing until everything foretold (about everything) in the Law and the Prophets has been accomplished and heaven and earth have passed away. 

Everything foretold (about everything) in the Law and the Prophets includes eternity, and the eternal kingdom of Messiah - the He will reign eternally.  

That means the Law of animal sacrifices must continue until eternity is fulfilled.   But the prophecies also say, "there will be no more death" .   So how could men go on KILLING lambs? 

4 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

The Greek word in that verse that is translated as "changed" and "change" has as it's primary connotation a change of location

Because "a change of location"  is a "primary" meaning, does not make it the ONLY meaning.  

Jesus will be "a priest forever" - AND - He will reign on the earth.  Melchizedek was a king and a priest - on the earth.   If Jesus has been made a priest of this order - like Melchizedek - then He will be a priest on the earth, as well as king.  He is also (presently) our High Priest in the Heavenly.   He is so BECAUSE He is God's firstborn.   He is "the firstborn over all creation".  Those who belong to Christ are Israel, and they are also God's firstborn.  Therefore they will reign as KINGS and PRIESTS - on the earth.  

4 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Verses 13 and 14 explain what it was in the Law of Moses that didn't match the priesthood of Jesus.  And Hebrews 8:4 confirms that the location of Jesus is vital to his priesthood because the Law that governed the earthly priesthood had not changed at the time Hebrews was written:
Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. " (Hebrews 8

In order to be a priest on the earth - at the time the Letter to the Hebrews was written - Christ would have to DESTROY the existing system.  Hmmmm.  I think He did that (or was it the Romans).  At any rate - it was destroyed (very shortly after the Letter to the Hebrews was written), to make way for Christ's eventual priesthood ON THE EARTH.   For 1900+ years, God  has made it impossible to offer an animal for sacrifice through the Aaronic priesthood, at the Temple of the LORD on the Mount in Jerusalem. 

Will another Temple be raised on the Mount - before Jesus returns?  I believe so.  But in the very last days.  Will the sacrifices begin again?  I believe so.  But the LORD will not build that house.   And we know they will "labor in vain", who build it.  We know the "Son of perdition" will sit in that house - showing himself that he is God.   And that House too, will be destroyed when Jesus returns.  "Heaven and earth will pass away". 

On the NEW earth - Christ will be king AND "priest forever".  All those who are His, will be "priests of God and of Christ" AND they will reign on the earth.  This means a "change of the law" - specifically of the priesthood.  

Guess the "new location" will be the NEW earth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
3 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Everything foretold (about everything) in the Law and the Prophets includes eternity, and the eternal kingdom of Messiah - the He will reign eternally.  

That means the Law of animal sacrifices must continue until eternity is fulfilled.   But the prophecies also say, "there will be no more death" .   So how could men go on KILLING lambs?

I don't think this problem will occur.  We might need to look at the actual wording of each one of the prophecies to make sure we aren't imposing our notion of eternity onto a prophecy that actually says something else. 

However, I think the answer to the problem could be found in what Jesus said in Matthew 5:18.  The KJV says the jots and tittles will not pass away "till all be fulfilled" [past tense] which could give the idea that a foretold eternity would have to be finished (over and done with) before the jots and tittles could pass away.  But the other versions say, "until all is accomplished".   It is likely that neither "fulfilled" nor "accomplished" carry the exact meaning of what Jesus actually said in Hebrew or Aramaic, which was translated into Greek and later translated from Greek into English, but let's go with "accomplished" for now.  Couldn't the eternal kingdom be considered "accomplished" when it has been established in it's prophesied form?  Some literal translations say "until all comes to pass", which could carry the meaning that the conditions for the passing away of the jots and titles would be met at the establishment of the eternal kingdom rather than at its end.

It might be kind of like (sort of, in a way, maybe) if a person says, "I won't be really happy until I am married."  We would understand that the "real happiness" is expected at the beginning of the marriage rather than when the marriage is finished, even though the experience of being married entails much more than the wedding.  Likewise, the eternal kingdom will entail much more than its establishment, but once it has been established, it has "come to pass" and could perhaps be considered "accomplished".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
3 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Because "a change of location"  is a "primary" meaning, does not make it the ONLY meaning.  

What you say is absolutely true.

However, if we have several meanings choose from, which should we choose, a meaning that directly contradicts many passages of Scripture that God had inspired throughout the centuries prior to the passage we are interpreting; or a meaning that agrees with all the passages of Scripture that God had previously inspired? 

Which meaning do you think would be accepted by the original readers of the passage, a meaning that required the readers to conclude that they had been deceived by Moses, by the prophets, and by Jesus; or a meaning that confirms that God's Word is dependable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn

 

4 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

In order to be a priest on the earth - at the time the Letter to the Hebrews was written - Christ would have to DESTROY the existing system.  Hmmmm.  I think He did that (or was it the Romans).  At any rate - it was destroyed (very shortly after the Letter to the Hebrews was written), to make way for Christ's eventual priesthood ON THE EARTH.   For 1900+ years, God  has made it impossible to offer an animal for sacrifice through the Aaronic priesthood, at the Temple of the LORD on the Mount in Jerusalem. 

Will another Temple be raised on the Mount - before Jesus returns?  I believe so.  But in the very last days.  Will the sacrifices begin again?  I believe so.  But the LORD will not build that house.   And we know they will "labor in vain", who build it.  We know the "Son of perdition" will sit in that house - showing himself that he is God.   And that House too, will be destroyed when Jesus returns.  "Heaven and earth will pass away".  

How much of what you have said here is actually stated somewhere in Scripture?  Not much, I think. Does Scripture tell us the reason the Temple was destroyed?  It was destroyed once prior to AD70 and was re-built at God's insistence.

Does Scripture say that the LORD will not rebuild the house for which Jesus is consumed with zeal (John 2:17)?  The gospel of John was most likely written after the Temple was destroyed in AD 70 yet John did not have the same attitude toward the Temple that you have.  What passage of Scripture tells us that the followers of Jesus are supposed to have a different attitude toward the Temple than the zeal that Jesus has?

The Temple that was re-built after the Babylonian exile was also abused at one point by a foreign ruler who opposed the worship of God, but that doesn't mean that God did not approve of the re-building of that temple at the time it was re-built. 

Where in Scripture does it actually say that God does not approve of the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem in the latter days (presumably because the "son of perdition" will at one point temporarily abuse that temple)?

There is a prophecy in Hosea 3:4 which I think foretells the 1900+ years since the temple was destroyed:
"For the children of Israel shall dwell many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or pillar, without ephod or household gods. Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God, and David their king, and they shall come in fear to the LORD and to his goodness in the latter days."

As I have pointed out before, the Throne of David has been vacant for much longer than the temple has been without sacrifices, yet we know from the prophecy of the angel in Luke 1:32 that Jesus will at some point in the future inherit that Throne of David that has been desolate for many centuries.  So the passage of many centuries is apparently not an indication of whether or not a throne (or a temple) is significant in God's future plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×