The jewish messiah

[942767]

Quote (gollamudi @ April 22 2010,17:41)

Quote (942767 @ April 22 2010,08:47) Quote (gollamudi @ April 21 2010,23:20) Quote (chosenone @ April 21 2010,18:04) Quote (gollamudi @ April 21 2010,17:51) Hi brothers Chosen One, Nick, 942767 and Kerwin, I appreciate your concern on me to understand N.T. Infact I ask these questions to satisfy my inner struggle to put together what is written in the whole Bible. But I find more queries than the earlier ones. I find our scriptures are human words about God but not literal words of God. Therefore there are discrepencies and contradictions. They may be inspired to some extent but not all. gollamudi.   Did you look up Jerimiah 31:31?  I thought you may have missed this in my last post to you. God Bless, Jerry. Thanks for your reply brother Jerry. Infact I also believe the same way as you told in your earlier post stating that God will make new covenant with Israel in future when the real Messiah comes. But I don't agree with the idea of Jesus had already been declared Messiah. Hi Adam: The Messiah has already come.  Read Daniel 2 which indicates that the kingdom would be established in the time of certain kings. Also, please read Daniel 9:25-27. And since the Messiah has already come according to scripture, who else could have been the Messiah but Jesus? Love in Christ, Marty No brother Marty God's kingdom has not yet been established on earth. It is still for future when the real Messiah comes God will establish His kingdom through His human Messiah.

Hi Adam:

Did you even read Daniel 2, before you gave me your answer? To what kings does this make reference?

When Jesus overcame sin and death by obeying God without sin even unto death on the cross, and was raised from the dead by God, he was exalted to head of the church at the right hand of God.

He conquered death and lives forever more, and although not all are subject to him at the present. Everyone will be. Those who are saved are part of his kingdom now. All who have died in Christ, and all who are alive and in Christ when he comes for the church will be saved from destruction. Those who have died in their sins will be resurrected after the 1000 year reign to be judged according to their works. Those who are alive who are not saved when he comes for the church will be judged by the seven last plagues.

And so, yes his kingdom exists now, but not every one that will be a part of his kingdom has entered therein.

Love in Christ,
Marty

[942767]

Hi Adam:

Here are a few scriptures from the New Testament to support what I have indicated:

Quote

Col 1:12Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: 13Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: 14In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. 18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. 19For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

Quote

1 Co 15:20But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Quote

Daniel 7:9I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. 10A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened. 11I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame. 12As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time. 13I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

Love in Christ,
Marty

[gollamudi]

Quote (942767 @ April 23 2010,09:59)

Hi Adam: Did you even read Daniel 2, before you gave me your answer?  To what kings does this make reference? When Jesus overcame sin and death by obeying God without sin even unto death on the cross, and was raised from the dead by God, he was exalted to head of the church at the right hand of God.   He conquered death and lives forever more, and although not all are subject to him at the present.  Everyone will be.  Those who are saved are part of his kingdom now.  All who have died in Christ, and all who are alive and in Christ when he comes for the church will be saved from destruction.  Those who have died in their sins will be resurrected after the 1000 year reign to be judged according to their works.  Those who are alive who are not saved when he comes for the church will be judged by the seven last plagues. And so, yes his kingdom exists now, but not every one that will be a part of his kingdom has entered therein. Love in Christ, Marty

Hi brother Marty, I do know about Dan 2, the problem here is not the spiritual kingdom what Christianity talk about but about worldy kingdom where God will put an end to all worldy kingdoms and establish His Messianic kingdom. It has not yet taken place. What Christianity believe about Jesus' 1000 year rule is not at all available in Jewish scriptures. So what do you say?

All the scriptures you quoted are from N.T have no base in O.T. It is purely the invention of Christianity stating that only through Jesus there is salvation. How can a Jew believe such assumptions?

Peace and love
Adam

[kerwin]

gollamudi,

I asked you about who sits on David's throne at this time and you have failed to answer me.  Why is that?

The current holder could perhaps be Benjamin Netanyahu of Likud.  As far as I know he is not a decendent of David.

So did God lie to David?

I am expecting you to state God did not lie but that the promise to David came with a condition that the line of Solomon violated multiple times.

The line of Jeconiah/Jehoiachin is considered the royal line in scripture but they were removed from the throne and Zedekiah was placed on it.   After Zedekiah was blinded and his children executed there is no evidence that anyone from David's line, much less the line of a Jeconiah/Jehoiachin, ever sat on the throne of David.  Even during Hasmonean rule the royal line did not sit on the throne of David but that honor fell to the priestly line of the Hasmonean.

Please provide your answer to the mystery that scripture has proposeed for us.  I have already provided mine.

[gollamudi]

For brother Kerwin…..

———In your approach, you maintain that the Bible teaches that there is to be at all times a Davidic ruler sitting on the royal throne. You also point out that whereas present-day Judaism lacks any ruler from the House of David, Christianity claims Jesus as its king. As a result, you conclude that only the church, which claims Jesus as its king, can rightly claim spiritual legitimacy because it alone boasts a Davidic ruler as ordained by the Jewish scriptures.

Although this question has been asked of me many times in the past, you are the first to use the words of Jeremiah and I Chronicles to support this argument. In general, this contention is based on a verse found in Genesis. Far be it from me to tell a missionary how to conduct his evangelism; however, the verses you quote do not in any way convey the message that the throne of David is to be occupied without interruption. In fact, as I will elaborate on below, all of these biblical texts clearly affirm the Davidic covenant — God has set aside the royal throne for the descendants of King David alone. None of the verses you mentioned, however, teach that there will not be an interruption of David's throne.

For example, you quoted Jeremiah 33:17-26 to support your contention, yet this text does not refer to a period when Jewry is in its diaspora as it is today. On the contrary, these verses are messianic in nature, and the prophecies they contain have yet to be fulfilled. In essence, this prophecy specifically foretells the events that will follow the advent of the messiah, which even in Christian terms has not yet occurred. Christian commentators therefore acknowledge that these verses contain a future prophecy of a millennial kingdom. For example, Charles Caldwell Ryrie writes in his annotation on Jeremiah 33:14-26,

The King-Messiah will emerge from the Davidic dynasty to rule in the millennial kingdom (see 23:5).1

In your reading of Jeremiah's words you made two serious errors that caused you to misconstrue the words of the prophet. Your first mistake was to take these verses out of context. Had you begun your quote one verse earlier, you would have quickly discovered that Jeremiah's words refer to a time in the future, and you would have concluded that this prophecy has no bearing on our time. Jeremiah 33:16 states,

In those days Judah will be saved, and Jerusalem will dwell safely. This is the name by which she will be called: The Lord Our Righteousness.

Ponder this for a moment: Has Judah been saved? Does Jerusalem dwell safely? This is certainly not the case today. As a result, the children of Israel live without a king. In fact, the predicament of the people of Judah and the condition of the city of Jerusalem became much worse immediately after the Christian century than it ever had been before.

The prophet Jeremiah is speaking of a golden era when the Jewish people will dwell in their holy city in peace and tranquility. Such a utopian age has not occurred since the glorious days of King Solomon. Only under these splendid circumstances will our anointed king again occupy the throne of David. This will occur, without interruption, only in the messianic age just as the prophet foretold.

Your second error, however, is far more puzzling because the very verses from which you quoted demonstrate that Jeremiah is speaking of an end-of-days prophecy. Let's take a quick look at Jeremiah 33:17-26.

. . . for thus says the Lord, “David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel, nor shall the priests, the Levites, lack a man to offer burnt offerings before Me, to kindle grain offerings, and to sacrifice continually.” The word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying, “Thus says the Lord, 'If you can break My covenant with the day and My covenant with the night, so that there will not be day and night in their season, then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant, so that he shall not have a son to reign on his throne, and with the Levites, the priests, My ministers. As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand of the sea measured, so will I multiply the descendants of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me.' ” Moreover the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying, “Have you not considered what these people have spoken, saying, 'The two families which the Lord has chosen, He has also cast them off?' Thus they have despised My people, as if they should no more be a nation before them.” Thus says the Lord, “If My covenant is not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth, then I will cast away the descendants of Jacob and David My servant, so that I will not take any of his descendants to be rulers over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; for I will cause their captives to return, and will have mercy on them.”

These 10 verses contain some of the most comforting messianic passages in the Jewish scriptures. None of them, however, speaks of our current era as you suggested; rather, each of these verses foretells of a future messianic age that has yet to come.

You constructed your entire thesis on verse 33:17, which reads,

. . . for thus says the Lord, “David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel . . . .

Yet surprisingly, you ignored the following verse that is a vital part of the same sentence and prophecy. This selective reading of Jeremiah's prophetic message led you to erroneously conclude that the prophet speaks of all of Jewish history. This is a misinterpretation of Jeremiah's prophecy. Verse 18 continues,

. . . nor shall the priests, the Levites, lack a man to offer burnt offerings before Me, to kindle grain offerings, and to sacrifice continually.

As you are well aware, neither a priest nor a Levite has brought a burnt, grain or sacrificial offering in Jerusalem in the last 1,900 years. The prophets of Israel foretold that the sacrificial system would be restored in all of its glory at the end of days. At what juncture therefore will the royal throne of David once again seat a ruler? At the same time that the sacrificial system will be restored to its rightful place in Jerusalem — during the advent of the messiah, and not before.

In fact, in Hosea 3:4-5, the prophet reveals this divine plan of history as he declares that the Jewish people would remain for many days without a king, sacrifice or high priest (ephod) until the messianic age. Hosea 3:4-5 states,

. . . for the children of Israel shall abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim. Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God and David their king. They shall fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days.

This prophecy completely undermines your contention that Judaism is deficient because it lacks a Davidic king. The Jewish people are today without a king precisely as Hosea had foretold. Moreover, the church's claim to have such a king places an enormous strain on Christian theology. Notice how Hosea, just as Jeremiah, connects the future king with future sacrifices as he declares that both of these ecclesiastical functions will only be restored in the “latter days.”

In your question you also referred to I Chronicles 17:12-14 to support your contention. I Chronicles 17:12-14 states,

He is the one who will build a house for Me, and I will establish his throne forever. I will be his Father, and he will be My son. I will never take My love away from him, as I took it away from your predecessor. I will set him over My house and My kingdom forever; his throne will be established forever.

As I mentioned above, I am somewhat surprised by the selection of verses from which you quoted to support your contention. I have yet to come across a Christian who used passages from Jeremiah an
d I Chronicles to support the claim that there can never be a moment without a king reigning on the throne of David. Missionaries typically use Genesis 49:10 to support this well-known argument. Although this text may appear at first glance to be somewhat more ambiguous than the scriptures you used, Christians zealously employ this verse to argue that the Torah states that the reign of Davidic kings will continue without interruption. Genesis 49:10 reads,

The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor a lawgiver from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes . . . .

What does the word “Shiloh” mean? Although there is some disagreement over the definition of this obscure word, there is wide agreement among Jews and Christians that Shiloh is an uncommon reference to the messiah. Bear in mind, this verse is part of the blessing that Jacob bestowed on his son Judah, the ancestor of King David. Using Genesis 49:10, Christians argue that Jacob is revealing that the “scepter,” the symbol of kingship, will never depart from the tribe of Judah even until the end of days. Pointing to the fact that the Jewish people maintain that there is no Davidic king today, missionaries argue that Judaism is a defective and blinding religion that has turned its back on Jesus, king of the Jews.

Although it appears as though the church has made a serious charge against the Jewish faith, this contention is born out of Christendom's inability to grasp one of the most important covenants in the Bible. The notion that the reign of a Davidic king will continue uninterrupted is unknown to the Jewish scriptures. This Christian creed has come about as the result of a skewed understanding of Jacob's blessing and a misinterpretation of a vital promise made by God to King David. In all of the verses that you quoted, the Bible declares that the legitimate royal throne of the Jewish people will never be occupied by anyone other than a member of the tribe of Judah and the House of David. I Chronicles 17:12-142 is therefore one of the most well-known passages in the Jewish scriptures because it contains God's everlasting covenant with King David — the irrevocable promise that the throne would never depart from his dynasty until the end of time.

Yet how can we be confident that this is the correct understanding of the scripture's message? How can we know with certainty that the Bible does not say that there would never be an interruption of a Davidic king to sit on the throne at every moment throughout history, as missionaries insist?

The answer is quite simple. Even the church concedes that there was no king on the throne of David for five centuries! In other words, missionaries acknowledge that from the time the Babylonians removed King Zedekiah from his throne and destroyed the first Temple until the Christian century there was in fact no king from the House of David who reigned over the Jewish people. If the Christian rendering of these prophecies is correct, why was there no king from the House of David who ruled during those 500 years? No further evidence is necessary to demonstrate that the church's interpretation of Genesis 49:10 and I Chronicles 17:12-14 is erroneous.

There is, however, a far more serious problem with which missionaries must contend regarding their claim that Jesus was a direct descendant from the House of David. According to Christian teachings, Jesus was born of a virgin. Although this assertion in the New Testament provides an important record of pagan influences on first century Christianity, it also deals a devastating blow to the church's claim that Jesus is the messiah from the lineage of King David.

By insisting that Jesus was born of a virgin, Christendom therefore concedes that Jesus lacked the human Jewish father necessary to trace his lineage back to King David and the tribe of Judah. This patrilinear connection to the Davidic dynasty is vital for any claimant to the throne of David because the lineage of the mother is irrelevant in this regard. In Numbers 1:18, the Torah clearly states that tribal affiliation is traced exclusively through the father.

They assembled the entire congregation together on the first day of the second month, and they declared their pedigrees after their families, by the house of their fathers . . . .”

Moreover, the author of the Book of Hebrews' strange assertion that Jesus was also a high priest further weakens the church's claim that Jesus is eligible to rule as a Davidic king. For example, the New Testament author writes:

Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess. (Hebrews 3:1)

Seeing then that we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. (Hebrews 4:14)

This stunning claim that Jesus was high priest further undermines the church's position that Jesus was a Davidic king. Simply put, the same man can never be both high priest and king. The high priest must be a descendant of Aaron (the brother of Moses), who was from the tribe of Levi. A Davidic king, on the other hand, has to trace his lineage from the House of David, descended from the tribe of Judah. It is impossible for the same person to be a descendant from both the tribes of Levi and Judah.

It isn't difficult to understand why the Book of Hebrews would repeatedly maintain that Jesus served as high priest — the notion that Jesus provided the ultimate sin sacrifice for the human race was vital to the core theology of this Pauline author. This astonishing claim, however, completely sabotages the missionary contention that Jesus was eligible to sit on David's throne.

There is no mystery as to how Christianity could find itself in this self-inflicted theological tangle. During the first century the church had endured a severe theological transition. In its earliest years, the founders of Christianity sought out Jews to join their young movement. As the first century began to draw to a close, however, Christendom recognized that the Jewish people were by and large unimpressed with their message. The church understood that if Christianity was going to flourish, they needed to attract converts from heathen communities that dotted the Fertile Crescent. Although the church's swift adaptation at this crucial juncture was highly successful, it would have devastating consequences for the theological complexion of this once-Jewish heresy.

Quite rapidly, Christendom inculcated pagan teachings that were widely familiar to the citizens of the Roman Empire. Virtually all of the god-men and divine saviors of Persia, the Far East, North Africa, and Rome were born to a virgin mother.3 As a result, the notion that Jesus was also born of a virgin quickly became well ensconced in the teachings of the very young Christian church.

Christianity would eventually import many other notable pagan beliefs into its teachings. Yet many of these creeds, such as the doctrine of the Trinity, would take a few more centuries and numerous political struggles until they were firmly a part of church orthodoxy. The belief that Jesus was born of a virgin, on the other hand, was adopted by the church so early that the New Testament was still being fashioned when it was embraced by first century Christians.

Christendom paid no small price for becoming the repository of pagan lore. The consequences for adopting the doctrine of the virgin birth created a theological disaster from which the church has never recovered and rendered every royal and priestly claim it has made for Jesus impossible.

Source: http://74.125.153.132/search?….k&gl=in

Hope this will answer your queries..
Adam

[kerwin]

Gollamundi,

That site does not address my argument which is based only on the promise God made to David in 1 Kings 2:2-4 and nothing else.

1 Kings 2:2-4(NIV) reads:

Quote

“I am about to go the way of all the earth,” he said. “So be strong, show yourself a man, and observe what the LORD your God requires: Walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses, so that you may prosper in all you do and wherever you go, and that the LORD may keep his promise to me: 'If your descendants watch how they live, and if they walk faithfully before me with all their heart and soul, you will never fail to have a man on the throne of Israel.'

The words “never fail” are pretty strong words.  Never means “not ever; at no time”.

Your source on the other hands states “None of the verses you mentioned, however, teach that there will not be an interruption of David's throne.”.   That may be true of the verses he is addressing but it is obviously not true of 1 Kings 2:2-4.

I am also not arguing that Jesus yet sits on the throne of David because I am not sure he does.   That time may be yet to come.  

My argument is that not only has there been times when David failed to have a descendent sit on his throne but also that God has placed others on the throne that were not of David’s line.  I am not sure about the current country of Israel being considered Judah.  The argument for it being so is that Jerusalem is the capitol.  IF that is true then it follows that Benjamin Netanyahu of Likud is the king that sits on David’s throne and not Jesus.

I make this argument to demonstrate that when God places a condition on his promises he is serious.  The condition was violated and so even though God kept his side of the bargain the house of Solomon failed to keep theirs.  Because of their failure David at times has had no descendant to sit on his throne.  Thankfully, God chose not to punish David for the sins of the line of Solomon and thus Jesus the Anointed will come to set on his throne.  Jesus is the heir to that throne but like David when Saul was King, Jesus is patient and will wait for God.  The time will come when a New Jerusalem will be established.

You seem prone to ignore that condition because it disagrees with your bias.

Note: My definition for “never” comes from dictionary.reference.com.

[942767]

Quote (gollamudi @ April 23 2010,16:14)

Quote (942767 @ April 23 2010,09:59) Hi Adam: Did you even read Daniel 2, before you gave me your answer?  To what kings does this make reference? When Jesus overcame sin and death by obeying God without sin even unto death on the cross, and was raised from the dead by God, he was exalted to head of the church at the right hand of God.   He conquered death and lives forever more, and although not all are subject to him at the present.  Everyone will be.  Those who are saved are part of his kingdom now.  All who have died in Christ, and all who are alive and in Christ when he comes for the church will be saved from destruction.  Those who have died in their sins will be resurrected after the 1000 year reign to be judged according to their works.  Those who are alive who are not saved when he comes for the church will be judged by the seven last plagues. And so, yes his kingdom exists now, but not every one that will be a part of his kingdom has entered therein. Love in Christ, Marty Hi brother Marty, I do know about Dan 2, the problem here is not the spiritual kingdom what Christianity talk about but about worldy kingdom where God will put an end to all worldy kingdoms and establish His Messianic kingdom. It has not yet taken place. What Christianity believe about Jesus' 1000 year rule is not at all available in Jewish scriptures. So what do you say? All the scriptures you quoted are from N.T have no base in O.T. It is purely the invention of Christianity stating that only through Jesus there is salvation. How can a Jew believe such assumptions? Peace and love Adam

Hi Adam:

Daniel 2 states the the kingdom would be established in the days of certain kings culminating with the Roman Empire during which time Jesus born into the world.

The kingdom has been established. Jesus is on the throne of his father David at the right hand of God. However, it is also a work in process as the gospel is being preached to every creature, and those who are being saved on a daily basis are being subjected to God through the King of kings, Jesus the Messiah.

I have given you scriptures from the OT as well as the NT. From what you call the Jewish scriptures, I have given you Psalm 110, Isaiah 53, and Daniel 2 and 7.

Daniel 9 in the following scriptures tell us precisely when the Messiah will come and also it has foretold of the destruction of the temple.

Quote

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.

To whom do you say the following scripture refers:

Quote

Daniel 7:13I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

I am not sure if there is any scripture in the OT which specifically mentions the 1000 year reign, but the following scriptures are related to this:

Quote

Daniel 7:9I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. 10A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, Daniel 12 1And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever. and the books were opened.

Love in Christ,
Marty

[Ed J]

Quote (gollamudi @ April 23 2010,17:26)

For brother Kerwin….. ———In your approach, you maintain that the Bible teaches that there is to be at all times a Davidic ruler sitting on the royal throne.  You also point out that whereas present-day Judaism lacks any ruler from the House of David, Christianity claims Jesus as its king.  As a result, you conclude that only the church, which claims Jesus as its king, can rightly claim spiritual legitimacy because it alone boasts a Davidic ruler as ordained by the Jewish scriptures. Although this question has been asked of me many times in the past, you are the first to use the words of Jeremiah and I Chronicles to support this argument.  In general, this contention is based on a verse found in Genesis.  Far be it from me to tell a missionary how to conduct his evangelism; however, the verses you quote do not in any way convey the message that the throne of David is to be occupied without interruption.  In fact, as I will elaborate on below, all of these biblical texts clearly affirm the Davidic covenant — God has set aside the royal throne for the descendants of King David alone.  None of the verses you mentioned, however, teach that there will not be an interruption of David's throne. For example, you quoted Jeremiah 33:17-26 to support your contention, yet this text does not refer to a period when Jewry is in its diaspora as it is today.  On the contrary, these verses are messianic in nature, and the prophecies they contain have yet to be fulfilled.  In essence, this prophecy specifically foretells the events that will follow the advent of the messiah, which even in Christian terms has not yet occurred.  Christian commentators therefore acknowledge that these verses contain a future prophecy of a millennial kingdom.  For example, Charles Caldwell Ryrie writes in his annotation on Jeremiah 33:14-26, The King-Messiah will emerge from the Davidic dynasty to rule in the millennial kingdom (see 23:5).1 In your reading of Jeremiah's words you made two serious errors that caused you to misconstrue the words of the prophet.  Your first mistake was to take these verses out of context.  Had you begun your quote one verse earlier, you would have quickly discovered that Jeremiah's words refer to a time in the future, and you would have concluded that this prophecy has no bearing on our time.  Jeremiah 33:16 states, In those days Judah will be saved, and Jerusalem will dwell safely.  This is the name by which she will be called: The Lord Our Righteousness. Ponder this for a moment: Has Judah been saved?  Does Jerusalem dwell safely?  This is certainly not the case today.  As a result, the children of Israel live without a king.  In fact, the predicament of the people of Judah and the condition of the city of Jerusalem became much worse immediately after the Christian century than it ever had been before. The prophet Jeremiah is speaking of a golden era when the Jewish people will dwell in their holy city in peace and tranquility.  Such a utopian age has not occurred since the glorious days of King Solomon.  Only under these splendid circumstances will our anointed king again occupy the throne of David.  This will occur, without interruption, only in the messianic age just as the prophet foretold. Your second error, however, is far more puzzling because the very verses from which you quoted demonstrate that Jeremiah is speaking of an end-of-days prophecy.  Let's take a quick look at Jeremiah 33:17-26. . . . for thus says the Lord, “David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel, nor shall the priests, the Levites, lack a man to offer burnt offerings before Me, to kindle grain offerings, and to sacrifice continually.”  The word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying, “Thus says the Lord, 'If you can break My covenant with the day and My covenant with the night, so that there will not be day and night in their season, then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant, so that he shall not have a son to reign on his throne, and with the Levites, the priests, My ministers.  As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand of the sea measured, so will I multiply the descendants of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me.' ” Moreover the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, saying, “Have you not considered what these people have spoken, saying, 'The two families which the Lord has chosen, He has also cast them off?'  Thus they have despised My people, as if they should no more be a nation before them.”  Thus says the Lord, “If My covenant is not with day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth, then I will cast away the descendants of Jacob and David My servant, so that I will not take any of his descendants to be rulers over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; for I will cause their captives to return, and will have mercy on them.” These 10 verses contain some of the most comforting messianic passages in the Jewish scriptures.  None of them, however, speaks of our current era as you suggested; rather, each of these verses foretells of a future messianic age that has yet to come. You constructed your entire thesis on verse 33:17, which reads, . . . for thus says the Lord, “David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel . . . . Yet surprisingly, you ignored the following verse that is a vital part of the same sentence and prophecy.  This selective reading of Jeremiah's prophetic message led you to erroneously conclude that the prophet speaks of all of Jewish history.  This is a misinterpretation of Jeremiah's prophecy.  Verse 18 continues, . . . nor shall the priests, the Levites, lack a man to offer burnt offerings before Me, to kindle grain offerings, and to sacrifice continually.   As you are well aware, neither a priest nor a Levite has brought a burnt, grain or sacrificial offering in Jerusalem in the last 1,900 years.  The prophets of Israel foretold that the sacrificial system would be restored in all of its glory at the end of days.  At what juncture therefore will the royal throne of David once again seat a ruler?  At the same time that the sacrificial system will be restored to its rightful place in Jerusalem — during the advent of the messiah, and not before. In fact, in Hosea 3:4-5, the prophet reveals this divine plan of history as he declares that the Jewish people would remain for many days without a king, sacrifice or high priest (ephod) until the messianic age.  Hosea 3:4-5 states, . . . for the children of Israel shall abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim.  Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the Lord their God and David their king.  They shall fear the Lord and His goodness in the latter days. This prophecy completely undermines your contention that Judaism is deficient because it lacks a Davidic king.  The Jewish people are today without a king precisely as Hosea had foretold.  Moreover, the church's claim to have such a king places an enormous strain on Christian theology.  Notice how Hosea, just as Jeremiah, connects the future king with future sacrifices as he declares that both of these ecclesiastical functions will only be restored in the “latter days.” In your question you also referred to I Chronicles 17:12-14 to support your contention.  I Chronicles 17:12-14 states, He is the one who will build a house for Me, and I will establish his throne forever.  I will be his Father, and he will be My son.  I will never take My love away from him, as I took it away from your predecessor.  I will set him over My hous e and My kingdom forever; his throne will be established forever. As I mentioned above, I am somewhat surprised by the selection of verses from which you quoted to support your contention.  I have yet to come across a Christian who used passages from Jeremiah and I Chronicles to support the claim that there can never be a moment without a king reigning on the throne of David.  Missionaries typically use Genesis 49:10 to support this well-known argument.  Although this text may appear at first glance to be somewhat more ambiguous than the scriptures you used, Christians zealously employ this verse to argue that the Torah states that the reign of Davidic kings will continue without interruption.  Genesis 49:10 reads, The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor a lawgiver from between his feet, Until Shiloh comes . . . . What does the word “Shiloh” mean?  Although there is some disagreement over the definition of this obscure word, there is wide agreement among Jews and Christians that Shiloh is an uncommon reference to the messiah.  Bear in mind, this verse is part of the blessing that Jacob bestowed on his son Judah, the ancestor of King David.  Using Genesis 49:10, Christians argue that Jacob is revealing that the “scepter,” the symbol of kingship, will never depart from the tribe of Judah even until the end of days.  Pointing to the fact that the Jewish people maintain that there is no Davidic king today, missionaries argue that Judaism is a defective and blinding religion that has turned its back on Jesus, king of the Jews. Although it appears as though the church has made a serious charge against the Jewish faith, this contention is born out of Christendom's inability to grasp one of the most important covenants in the Bible.  The notion that the reign of a Davidic king will continue uninterrupted is unknown to the Jewish scriptures.  This Christian creed has come about as the result of a skewed understanding of Jacob's blessing and a misinterpretation of a vital promise made by God to King David.  In all of the verses that you quoted, the Bible declares that the legitimate royal throne of the Jewish people will never be occupied by anyone other than a member of the tribe of Judah and the House of David.  I Chronicles 17:12-142 is therefore one of the most well-known passages in the Jewish scriptures because it contains God's everlasting covenant with King David — the irrevocable promise that the throne would never depart from his dynasty until the end of time. Yet how can we be confident that this is the correct understanding of the scripture's message?  How can we know with certainty that the Bible does not say that there would never be an interruption of a Davidic king to sit on the throne at every moment throughout history, as missionaries insist? The answer is quite simple.  Even the church concedes that there was no king on the throne of David for five centuries!  In other words, missionaries acknowledge that from the time the Babylonians removed King Zedekiah from his throne and destroyed the first Temple until the Christian century there was in fact no king from the House of David who reigned over the Jewish people.  If the Christian rendering of these prophecies is correct, why was there no king from the House of David who ruled during those 500 years?  No further evidence is necessary to demonstrate that the church's interpretation of Genesis 49:10 and I Chronicles 17:12-14 is erroneous. There is, however, a far more serious problem with which missionaries must contend regarding their claim that Jesus was a direct descendant from the House of David.  According to Christian teachings, Jesus was born of a virgin.  Although this assertion in the New Testament provides an important record of pagan influences on first century Christianity, it also deals a devastating blow to the church's claim that Jesus is the messiah from the lineage of King David. By insisting that Jesus was born of a virgin, Christendom therefore concedes that Jesus lacked the human Jewish father necessary to trace his lineage back to King David and the tribe of Judah.  This patrilinear connection to the Davidic dynasty is vital for any claimant to the throne of David because the lineage of the mother is irrelevant in this regard.  In Numbers 1:18, the Torah clearly states that tribal affiliation is traced exclusively through the father. They assembled the entire congregation together on the first day of the second month, and they declared their pedigrees after their families, by the house of their fathers . . . .” Moreover, the author of the Book of Hebrews' strange assertion that Jesus was also a high priest further weakens the church's claim that Jesus is eligible to rule as a Davidic king.  For example, the New Testament author writes: Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess. (Hebrews 3:1) Seeing then that we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. (Hebrews 4:14) This stunning claim that Jesus was high priest further undermines the church's position that Jesus was a Davidic king.  Simply put, the same man can never be both high priest and king.  The high priest must be a descendant of Aaron (the brother of Moses), who was from the tribe of Levi.  A Davidic king, on the other hand, has to trace his lineage from the House of David, descended from the tribe of Judah.  It is impossible for the same person to be a descendant from both the tribes of Levi and Judah. It isn't difficult to understand why the Book of Hebrews would repeatedly maintain that Jesus served as high priest — the notion that Jesus provided the ultimate sin sacrifice for the human race was vital to the core theology of this Pauline author.  This astonishing claim, however, completely sabotages the missionary contention that Jesus was eligible to sit on David's throne. There is no mystery as to how Christianity could find itself in this self-inflicted theological tangle.  During the first century the church had endured a severe theological transition.  In its earliest years, the founders of Christianity sought out Jews to join their young movement.  As the first century began to draw to a close, however, Christendom recognized that the Jewish people were by and large unimpressed with their message.  The church understood that if Christianity was going to flourish, they needed to attract converts from heathen communities that dotted the Fertile Crescent.  Although the church's swift adaptation at this crucial juncture was highly successful, it would have devastating consequences for the theological complexion of this once-Jewish heresy. Quite rapidly, Christendom inculcated pagan teachings that were widely familiar to the citizens of the Roman Empire.  Virtually all of the god-men and divine saviors of Persia, the Far East, North Africa, and Rome were born to a virgin mother.3 As a result, the notion that Jesus was also born of a virgin quickly became well ensconced in the teachings of the very young Christian church. Christianity would eventually import many other notable pagan beliefs into its teachings.  Yet many of these creeds, such as the doctrine of the Trinity, would take a few more centuries and numerous political struggles until they were firmly a part of church orthodoxy.  The belief that Jesus was born of a virgin, on the other hand, was adopted by the church so early that the New Testament was still being fashioned when it was embraced by first century Christians. Christendom paid no small price for becoming the repository of pagan lore.  The consequences for adopting the doctrine of the virgin birth created a theological disaster from which the church has never recovered and rendered every royal and priestly claim it has made for Jesus impossible. Source: http://74.125.153.132/search?….k&gl=in Hope this will answer your queries.. Adam

Hi Gollamudi

1John 4:2-Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth
that [יהשוע המשיח YÄ-shü-ă hä-Mäh-shē-äkh] is come in the flesh is of God:
And every spirit that confesseth not that [המשיח hä-Mäh-shē-äkh] is come in
the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have
heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world(and here too).

Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[NickHassan]

Hi GM,
Rise above the worldly intellectualism.
Seek the Spirit

[chosenone]

Hi gollamudi.
I hope you don't mind me intruding in this thread, because I haven't really read enough about the subject you are discussing. But I did read a little of your post and came across this part…

In your question you also referred to I Chronicles 17:12-14 to support your contention. I Chronicles 17:12-14 states,

He is the one who will build a house for Me, and I will establish his throne forever. I will be his Father, and he will be My son. I will never take My love away from him, as I took it away from your predecessor. I will set him over My house and My kingdom forever; his throne will be established forever.

The point I would like to make is in this part… “I will set him over My house and My kingdom forever; his throne will be established forever”.

This is an example of a mistranslation of scripture, the word “forever” is mistranslated, it should be “eon”. It is a commom error throught the bible, causing much confusion. The word 'eon', should never be translated as 'forever' or 'endless'.

If you are at all interested in research that includes an effort to correctly translate, and not just “interpert” scripture, please look at what the 'Concordant Publishing Concern' has done. They also have a website “www.concordant.org”.
Hope you didn't mind me cutting in to your thread.

God Bless, Jerry.

[gollamudi]

Quote (chosenone @ April 30 2010,06:44)

Hi gollamudi.   I hope you don't mind me intruding in this thread, because I haven't really read enough about the subject you are discussing.  But I did read a little of your post and came across this part… In your question you also referred to I Chronicles 17:12-14 to support your contention.  I Chronicles 17:12-14 states, He is the one who will build a house for Me, and I will establish his throne forever.  I will be his Father, and he will be My son.  I will never take My love away from him, as I took it away from your predecessor.  I will set him over My house and My kingdom forever; his throne will be established forever.   The point I would like to make is in this part… “I will set him over My house and My kingdom forever; his throne will be established forever”.   This is an example of a mistranslation of scripture, the word “forever” is mistranslated, it should be “eon”.  It is a commom error throught the bible, causing much confusion.  The word 'eon', should never be translated as 'forever' or 'endless'.   If you are at all interested in research that includes an effort to correctly translate, and not just “interpert” scripture, please look at what the 'Concordant Publishing Concern' has done.  They also have a website  “www.concordant.org”.   Hope you didn't mind me cutting in to your thread. God Bless, Jerry.

Hi brother Jerry, thanks for your helping hand. Infact I also believe that the word 'eons' should not be taken as 'forever or endless' in many contexts in our Bible. I have to hear from brother Kerwin on this view.

Thanks and peace to you
Adam

[gollamudi]

Quote (kerwin @ April 23 2010,18:30)

Gollamundi, That site does not address my argument which is based only on the promise God made to David in 1 Kings 2:2-4 and nothing else. 1 Kings 2:2-4(NIV) reads: Quote “I am about to go the way of all the earth,” he said. “So be strong, show yourself a man, and observe what the LORD your God requires: Walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses, so that you may prosper in all you do and wherever you go, and that the LORD may keep his promise to me: 'If your descendants watch how they live, and if they walk faithfully before me with all their heart and soul, you will never fail to have a man on the throne of Israel.' The words “never fail” are pretty strong words.  Never means “not ever; at no time”. Your source on the other hands states “None of the verses you mentioned, however, teach that there will not be an interruption of David's throne.”.   That may be true of the verses he is addressing but it is obviously not true of 1 Kings 2:2-4. I am also not arguing that Jesus yet sits on the throne of David because I am not sure he does.   That time may be yet to come.   My argument is that not only has there been times when David failed to have a descendent sit on his throne but also that God has placed others on the throne that were not of David’s line.  I am not sure about the current country of Israel being considered Judah.  The argument for it being so is that Jerusalem is the capitol.  IF that is true then it follows that Benjamin Netanyahu of Likud is the king that sits on David’s throne and not Jesus. I make this argument to demonstrate that when God places a condition on his promises he is serious.  The condition was violated and so even though God kept his side of the bargain the house of Solomon failed to keep theirs.  Because of their failure David at times has had no descendant to sit on his throne.  Thankfully, God chose not to punish David for the sins of the line of Solomon and thus Jesus the Anointed will come to set on his throne.  Jesus is the heir to that throne but like David when Saul was King, Jesus is patient and will wait for God.  The time will come when a New Jerusalem will be established. You seem prone to ignore that condition because it disagrees with your bias. Note: My definition for “never” comes from dictionary.reference.com.

Hi brother Kerwin,
Infact I am in agreement with you on God keeping the promise given to King David. Yes it was conditional but that doesn't mean descendents of Solomon had been eliminated from the royal lineage of Messiah. Even you are of the opinion that Jesus has not been officially sitting on the throne of David so far. A Jewish view states that their Messiah will sit on the throne of David in the future kingdom, may be in the end days. So what way they differ from this view of yours except you make Jesus as Messiah?

Peacde to you
Adam

[GeneBalthrop]

Adam……….I also believe as Jerry said, that “eons” represents only a period of time and in not way represents eternal, it is defenitely a source of confusion in scripture, if it is rendered as never ending eons, or eons upon eons, then that could mean a continual event.

Peace and love to you and yours ADAM………………….gene

[gollamudi]

Thank you very much brother Gene.

[gollamudi]

Will the Real “New Covenant” Please Stand Up? (Jeremiah 31:30-36)

I. Introduction

The passage Jeremiah 31:30-36[31-37 in Christian Bibles] is an
important so-called 'proof text' in the toolbox of Christian
apologists and missionaries. This passage is unique in that it
contains the only occurrence in the Hebrew Bible of the Hebrew
phrase (brit khadashah), a new covenant. Christian apologists and
missionaries thus point to this passage as one that foretells the
replacement of what Christians call the 'Old Covenant' which, is the
Torah in Judaism, with their New Covenant, which is more commonly
referred to as the New Testament.

To Christian and Jews, Jeremiah 31:30-36[31-37] is a messianic
passage, albeit for different reasons. A close examination of the
Hebrew text of this passage within its proper context, along with
other relevant passages from the Hebrew Bible, demonstrates that this
messianic passage is irrelevant to the Christian New Testament and to
the Christian messiah.

II. Christian and Jewish Translations of Jeremiah 31:30-36
[31-37]

The Hebrew text and side-by-side English renditions of the passage
Jeremiah 31:30-36[31-37] – the King James Version (KJV) translation
in the left column and a Jewish translation in the middle column next
to the Hebrew text, are displayed in Table II-1. [Note: In some
Jewish editions the passage is numbered as Jeremiah 31:31-37, which
is the way it also appears in Christian Bibles, where Chapter 31
starts with the verse that is normally the last verse in Chapter 30 –
Jeremiah 30:25]. The KJV rendition also contains in it references to
several key passages in the New Testament that appear to be invoking
portions of the passage; these references were taken from the New
American Standard Bible (NASB).

Table II-1 – Jeremiah 31:30-36[31-37]

King James Version Translation
Jewish Translation from Hebrew
The Hebrew Text

Jeremiah 31
31
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new
covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:(1) (2)
30
“Behold, days are coming,” says the L-rd, “when I will form with the
House of Israel and with the House of Judah a new covenant.

32
Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the
day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of
Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto
them, saith the LORD:(1)
31
Not like the covenant that I formed with their forefathers on the
day I held them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt,
for they broke My covenant, although I was a husband unto them,” says
the L-rd.

33
But 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.(1) (3)
32
“For this is the covenant that I shall form with the House of Israel
after those days,” says the L-rd; “I will place My Torah within them,
and I will inscribe it upon their heart; and I will be their G-d and
they shall be a people for Me.
34
And 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.(1)
33
And no longer they shall teach, a man his neighbor, and a man his
brother, saying, 'know the L-rd,' for they shall all know Me, from
their smallest to their greatest,” says the L-rd, “for I will forgive
their iniquity, and their sin I will no longer remember.”

35
Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and
the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night,
which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts
is his name:
34
So said the L-rd, Who gives the sun to illuminate by day, the laws
of the moon and the stars to illuminate at night, Who stirs up the
sea to make its waves roar, the L-rd of Hosts is His name:

36
If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the
seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for
ever.
35
“If these laws could depart from before Me,” says the L-rd, “so will
the seed of Israel cease being a nation before Me for all time.”

37
Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the
foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off
all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD.
36
So said the L-rd, “if the heavens above will be measured and the
foundations of the earth below will be fathomed, so too will I reject
all the seed of Israel because of all they did,” says the L-rd.

(1) Hebrews 8:8-12(KJV) – See Section III.A

(2) Luke 22:20(KJV) – Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

2 Corinthians 3:6(KJV) – Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

(3) Hebrews 10:16(KJV) – This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

2 Corinthians 3:3(KJV) – Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of
Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

(4) 1 Thessalonians 4:9(KJV) – But as touching brotherly love ye need not that I write unto you: for ye yourselves are taught of God to love one another.

John 6:45(KJV) – It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

Romans 11:27(KJV) – For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Hebrews 10:17(KJV) – And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

Overall, the two translations are remarkably similar; there are no
major issues of mistranslation to be resolved.

As noted, this passage is referenced in the New Testament on a number
of occasions and, when 'quoted' in Chapter 8 of the Letter to the
Hebrews, it is subjected to some rather serious manipulation – an
issue that will be addressed below.

III. Overview of Christian and Jewish Interpretations

A. The Christian Perspective

The Christian position concerning Jeremiah's new covenant is
contained in the 8th chapter of the Letter to the Hebrews in the New
Testament.

The author of the Letter to the Hebrews first states the rationale:

Hebrews 8:6-8(KJV) – (6) But now hath he obtained a more excellent
ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant,
which was established upon better promises. (7) For if that first
covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought
for the second. (8) For finding fault with them, he saith, …

Following the opening phrase of Hebrews 8:8, the author proceeds to
cite a carefully edited version of the first four verses from the
passage in Jeremiah, Jeremiah 31:30-33[31-34]:

Hebrews 8:8-12(KJV) (8)… Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when
I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the
house of Judah: (9) Not according to the covenant that I made with
their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them
out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant,
and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. (10) For this is the
covenant that I will make with the h
ouse of Israel after those days,
saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in
their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a
people: (11) And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and
every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me,
from the least to the greatest. (12) For I will be merciful to
their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I
remember no more.

Note the highlighted phrase in Hebrews 8:9 above, and compare it with
the (corresponding) highlighted phrases in Jeremiah 31[32] found in
both Jewish and KJV renditions shown in Table II-1 above.

The author of the Letter to the Hebrews then concludes his
discussion by explaining the status of the new covenant as compared
with the old covenant:

Hebrews 8:13 – In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the
first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish
away.

Thus, the overall message here is that Jeremiah's (brit khadashah),
new covenant, is the covenant of the cross that was fulfilled some
2,000 years ago when, according to Christian theology, the blood of
Jesus was shed for the sins of mankind. In other words, the author
of the Letter to the Hebrews proclaims that the covenant G-d made
with Israel at Mount Sinai expired. And, therefore, the Jewish
people need no longer keep the commandments of the Torah since
salvation now comes with the belief in Jesus as high priest,
sacrifice, lord, and messiah:

Matthew 26:28 – For this is my blood of the new testament, which is
shed for many for the remission of sins.

According to Christian theology, the new covenant [ (brit khadashah)]
has replaced the existing covenant, which is deemed old and flawed.
And, thus, Jeremiah's (brit khadashah), new covenant, is a prophecy
that was fulfilled with the death of Jesus on the cross, an event
that led to the writing of the New Testament of Christianity (the
Greek noun διαθήκη (diatheke) means a covenant or a testament), the one that replaced the (Mosaic) Law, i.e., the Torah.

B. The Jewish Perspective

A correct reading and understanding of the Hebrew text shows
unequivocally that Jeremiah 31:30-36[31-37] is not a prophecy that
was fulfilled during the 1st century C.E., or at any other time in
the past. Rather, it is a prophecy that is yet to be fulfilled, one
that will be fulfilled in the future, in the messianic era. In fact,
this passage contains messianic agenda items, i.e., messianic
prophecies, which are yet to be fulfilled – the ingathering and
restoration of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel, and the
existence of a state of the universal knowledge of G-d.

1. Ingathering and Restoration of the Jewish People

The passage begins with the prophet addressing both the House of
Israel and the House of Judah, which clearly indicates that Jeremiah
is addressing an ingathered Jewish people. This was not the case
when those words were written, and it certainly was not the case at
the time of Jesus' death. To the contrary, during the 1st century
C.E. the House of Israel no longer existed as a people because
Assyria had exiled the Northern Kingdom of Israel well over 700 years
earlier (during the 8th century B.C.E.). Moreover, in the 1st
century C.E. the Jewish people were dispersed throughout the Roman
Empire and beyond. Thus, not even the House of Judah was all present
in the Holy Land at that time – the Jews were exiled into the
Diaspora and were spread around much more than during their previous
exile in Babylon following the destruction of Solomon's Temple.

The fact that the era of which Jeremiah is speaking – a future
messianic age when all the Jewish people, both House of Judah and
House of Israel, will be restored together in their rightful place,
the land of Israel – has not yet arrived, is addressed elsewhere by
the prophet:

Jeremiah 16:15 – But, As the L-rd lives, Who brought the people of
Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands where He
had driven them; and I will bring them back to their land that I gave
to their forefathers.

This is also confirmed by some of Jeremiah's fellow prophets:

Isaiah 11:12 – And He shall carry a banner for the nations, and He
shall collect the lost of Israel, and the dispersed one of Judah He
shall gather from the four corners of the earth.

Ezekiel 37:21-22 – (21) And say to them, Thus says the L-rd G-
d: “Behold, I will take the Children of Israel from among the nations
where they have gone, and I will gather them on every side, and I
will bring them into their land; (22) And I will make them into one
nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall
be king to them all; and they shall no longer be two nations, and
neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more.

Zechariah 10:6 – And I will strengthen the House of Judah, and the
House of Joseph I will save, and I will get them settled for I have
mercy on them, and they shall be as though I had not neglected them;
for I am the L-rd their G-d, and will respond to them.

Note how, in Jeremiah 30[31], the prophet starts out by speaking
of “days are coming” where he mentions both Houses – the House of
Israel and the House of Judah. Then, in Jeremiah 32[33], he mentions
only the House of Israel when he talks about an era “after those
days”, i.e., the days after the scattered Jewish people are
repatriated to the Land of Israel and are united.

The message in these Scriptures is unambiguous – the dispersed Jewish
people will be returned to the Land of Israel and will be united once
again as one nation lead by the promised Jewish Messiah/King.

2. Universal Knowledge of G-d

A verse in this passage that is often overlooked or ignored by
Christian apologists and missionaries is Jeremiah 33[34]. Two
interesting facts emerge from this verse. First, the verse starts
with the preposition (ve), and, which means that Jeremiah 31:30-36
[31-37] is not a two-prophecy passage. Rather, the presence of this
preposition, (ve), and, at the beginning of Jeremiah 33[34] connects
it with the previous verse, Jeremiah 32[33], which makes it a
continuation of the earlier prophecy and not the start of another,
separate prophecy.

Jeremiah 31:33[34] – “And no longer shall they teach, a man his
neighbor, and a man his brother, saying, 'Know the L-rd', for they
shall all know Me, from their smallest to their greatest,” says the L-
rd, “for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will no
longer remember.”

This verse speaks of a time when the knowledge of G-d will be
universal. Ask yourself: “Is there a universal knowledge of G-d in
the world today?” Well, if that were the case, then why are
Christian missionaries still spread all over the globe, spending many
millions of dollars annually, trying to teach everyone to “know the
(Christian) lord”. Is this not in complete contradiction to the
words of Jeremiah 33 [34]? The presence of these Christian
missionaries is a de-facto admission by the Church that the prophecy
has not yet been fulfilled!

The message of a universal knowledge of G-d in the messianic era
found in Jeremiah 33[34] is also echoed by other prophets:

Isaiah 11:9 – They shall neither harm nor destroy on My entire Holy
Mountain; for the earth shall be full of knowledge of the L-rd, as
the waters of the sea cover up [the sea floor].

Zechariah 14:9 – And the L-rd shall be King over all the earth; on
that day shall the L-rd be One, and His Name One.

As can be seen from the above, according to the Jewish perspective,
the prophecy of Jeremiah's (brit khadashah), a new covenant, has not
yet come to pass – its fulfill
ment is coupled with Israel being once
again united in the Holy Land and with the existence of a universal
knowledge of G-d.

IV. Does This Passage Foretell the (Christian) New
Testament?

A comparison of the Christian and Jewish perspectives indicates that
they cannot both be valid. Though the Jewish perspective clearly
demonstrates how this messianic passage has not yet been realized,
there still remains the issue of the nature of Jeremiah's (brit
khadashah), a new covenant, first mentioned in Jeremiah 31:30[31],
and then alluded to throughout the rest of the passage. In order to
help resolve this issue, a closer look at the passage is required.

An Attempt to Reverse the Prophetic Message

In his deliberate revision of the original text of Jeremiah 31:31
[32], the author of the Letter to the Hebrews had intended to solve a
serious theological problem for the Church – the prophesied eternity
of the Jewish people and the Torah – he attempted to reverse the
prophet's original message.

Hebrews 8:9 appears to be 'quoting' Jeremiah 31:31[32]. However,
upon checking the Hebrew phrase in Jeremiah 31:31[32] and its
respective translations, one discovers that, , is translated in both
Jewish and KJV renditions as, “for they broke my covenant, although I
was a(n) husband unto them”, but is rendered in Hebrews 8:9
as, “because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them
not”. The two highlighted phrases are obviously not congruent in
their context.

The Hebrew term for the English phrase I was a husband is
(ba'alti). The same conjugated verb appears once again in the Book
of Jeremiah, and in the same context, at Jeremiah 3:14. The Hebrew
root verb (ba'al) is most commonly applied throughout the Hebrew
Bible in the context of being espoused. Of its 16 occurrences, in 11
cases (ba'al) refers to an espousal, in one case it is used in a
metaphorical sense, and in the remaining four cases it is used in the
context of being a master over someone or something. A Hebrew noun
derived from this verb is (ba'al), which can mean a husband (either
married or betrothed) or a master and, in various combinations with
other terms, it is used to describe someone who possesses certain
attributes, qualities, or skills. As it concerns the verb (ba'al)
in the context of espousal or mastership, it should be rather obvious
that disregarding someone – as Hebrews 8:9 has it, is the antithesis
of being a husband or master of someone – as Jeremiah 31:31[32] has
it.

Another interesting aspect of the attempt at Hebrew Bible revisionism
by the author of the Letter to the Hebrews is that he actually winds
up contradicting one of the main messages conveyed in the Gospels –
that Jesus did not come to change 'The Law' but to fulfill it:

Matthew 5:17-19(KJV) – (17) Think not that I am come to destroy the
law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (18)
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one
tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
(19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments,
and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom
of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be
called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Perhaps the editing by the author of the Letter to the Hebrews was
not done as carefully as initially stated.

Is the 'New Covenant' A 'New Torah/Law'?

What is a covenant anyway? The American Heritage Dictionary, p. 334,
Second College Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company (1991), defines
covenant (the noun) as follows:

covenant n. 1. A binding agreement made between two or more persons
or parties; compact. 2. Law. a. A formal sealed agreement or
contract. b. A suit to recover damages for violation of such a
contract.

In other words, a covenant is a contractual agreement between two
parties. Concerning the case in point here, the covenant is merely
the agreement made by the Children of Israel to accept and obey the
Torah in return for the promises made by G-d.

The opening promise to Israel is made just before the revelation at
Mount Sinai:

Exodus 19:5 – And now, if you will obey Me and keep My covenant, you
shall be to Me a treasure out of all peoples, for Mine is the entire
earth.

The terms of the contract consist of blessings that would accrue by
obedience and warnings and curses that would be the consequences of
disobedience. Detailed blessings in the wake of obedience are found
in Leviticus 26:3-13, in Deuteronomy 11:13-25, and in Deuteronomy
28:1-14. The wages of disobedience are detailed in Leviticus 26:14-
39, and again in Deuteronomy 28:15-68.

Exodus 24:3-4,7 – (3) And Moses came and told the people all the
words of the L-rd and all the ordinances, and all the people answered
in unison and said, “All the words that the Lord has spoken we will
do.” (4) And Moses wrote all the words of the L-rd, and he arose
early in the morning and built an altar at the foot of the mountain
and twelve monuments for the twelve tribes of Israel.

(7) And he [Moses] took the Book of the Covenant [ (sefer ha'brit)]
and read it for the people to hear, and they said, “All that the L-rd
spoke we will do and we will hear.”

It is important to recognize that the covenant is the contractual
agreement to obey the Torah and is not the Torah itself. The Torah
contains the commandments that are to be obeyed, and that is why it
is referred to as (sefer ha'brit), the Book of the Covenant. Thus,
breaking the agreement by Israel does not change or invalidate the
Torah!

The fact that this (brit khadashah), a new covenant, will not
replace the Torah is emphasized by Jeremiah himself:

Jeremiah 31:32 – “For this is the covenant that I shall form with the
House of Israel after those days,” says the L-rd, “I will place My
Torah [ (torati)] within them, and I will inscribe it upon their
heart; and I will be their G-d and they shall be a people for Me.”

The Hebrew term (torah) is used in the Hebrew Bible in two general
contexts. First, it could refer to rules, doctrines, or other
instructions for behavior, i.e., laws, statutes, and ordinances.
Second, it could refer to the Mosaic Law, which is commonly referred
to as the Torah.

The context of the Hebrew term (torati), My Torah, is unambiguous –
it refers to the Torah. This is supported by the way Jeremiah uses
the root noun (torah) throughout his Book, in which the noun appears
on 11 occasions in various forms. The remaining ten instances of
(torah) in the Book of Jeremiah are at: Jeremiah 2:8, 6:19, 8:8, 9:12/
[13], 16:11, 18:18, 26:4, 32:23, 44:10,23. In all ten cases the
application is in the context of the Torah, as is the case in point –
at Jeremiah 31:32[33]. It is interesting to note that even the KJV
translators rendered all 11 instances as the/my/his law, as
appropriate in the individual passages, clearly indicating this is
The Law, a term commonly applied in the New Testament as a reference
to the Mosaic Law, i.e., the Torah.

Sidebar note: Jeremiah 31:32[33] would have been the optimal place
for the prophet to inform the reader that this new covenant will,
indeed, involve a new Torah. All he would have had to do is say
(torah khadashah), a new Torah, or (torati ha'khadashah), My new
Torah, instead of saying (torati), My Torah, and the deed would have
been accomplished. But he did not do that!

The 'New Covenant' vs. the 'Original Sinai Covenant'

In Jeremiah 31:31[32], the prophet declares that the new covenant
will be,

Not like the covenant that I formed with their forefathers on the day
I took them by the hand to take th
em out of the land of Egypt, for
they broke My covenant,…

So, in what way will this new covenant differ from the original Sinai
covenant? The only difference between the two covenants is in where
(sefer ha'brit), the Book of the Covenant resides. In the original
Sinai covenant, it was placed in our mouths,

Exodus 13:9 – And it shall be to you for a sign upon your hand, and
for a memorial between your eyes, in order that the Torah of the L-rd
shall be in your mouth; for with a mighty hand has the L-rd brought
you out of Egypt.

And the contract was verbally agreed to, as was seen in Exodus 24:3,7
above. According to Jeremiah 31:32[33], the new covenant will be
placed within us:

…I will place My Torah within them and I will inscribe it upon their
heart…

In other words, this new covenant will simply be an integral part of
us and, thus, will become just part of the Jewish way of life.

The Everlasting Sinai Covenant

Christian apologists and missionaries often use the following phrase
found in Jeremiah 31:32[33],

…for they broke My covenant…

to support their claim that the original Sinai covenant is no longer
in force. After all, they claim, it is stated very clearly here that
Israel broke the contract. Therefore, the New Testament is the new
covenant prophesied by Jeremiah, and it replaces the 'Old
Covenant/Testament'.

Is that claim true? Evidently, those who make such a claim are
confused about the difference between the covenant and the Book of
the Covenant, as was explained in Section IV.B&C above. Here is what
the Hebrew Bible teaches about this matter. Although the people of
Israel, throughout their history, often fell short of fulfilling
their end of the agreement made at Mount Sinai and, in effect, broke
the covenant, G-d repeatedly states that He will not break His
covenant with Israel:

Leviticus 26:44-45 – (44) And despite all this, when they are in the
land of their enemies, I will not despise them nor will I reject them
to annihilate them, thereby breaking My covenant with them; for I am
the L-rd their G-d. (45) And I will for their sakes remember the
covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt
before the eyes of the nations, to be a G-d to them; I am the L-rd.

Judges 2:1 – And an angel of the L-rd came up from Gilgal to Bochim,
and said [in G-d's name], “I will bring you up from Egypt, and I have
brought you to the land which I swore to your forefathers, and I
said, 'I will never break My covenant with you.'”

Ezekiel 16:59-60 – (59) For thus said the L-rd G-d [to Jerusalem]: “I
have done with you in accordance to that which you have done, that
you have despised an oath in breaking a covenant. (60) Nevertheless
I will remember My covenant with you in the days of your youth, and I
will establish with you an everlasting covenant.

Psalms 105:8-10 – (8) He has remembered His covenant forever, the
word which He commanded to a thousand generations. (9) That which He
had made with Abraham, and His oath to Isaac; (10) And He
established it for Jacob as a law, and for Israel as an everlasting
covenant;

There is no argument about the fact that Israel has strayed from the
path many times since the promise made at Mount Sinai. And G-d
punished Israel for it, just as He said He would do. Yet, the Hebrew
Bible clearly shows that G-d will neither break that covenant nor
replace the Torah – The Torah is eternal.

So, given the evidence presented from the Hebrew Bible, the response
to the question asked in the title of this Section IV, “Does This
Passage Foretell the (Christian) New Testament?”, is that the claim
made by Christian apologists and missionaries about this passage
foretelling the New Testament cannot be supported with any other
Scriptures from within the Hebrew Bible. Quite to the contrary, the
Hebrew Bible establishes the eternity of both the covenant and the
Torah.

V. Summary

The analysis presented above demonstrates how to correctly read and
interpret the passage Jeremiah 31:30-36[31-37]. The effort by an
author of the New Testament to revise the prophetic message of
Jeremiah about the Jewish people and the Torah in the messianic era
and turn it into a prophecy about the coming of the Christian New
Testament, has been exposed.

The Jewish prophets foretell that, in the messianic era, the Jewish
people will observe the commandments of the Torah:

Isaiah 2:3 – And many people shall go and say, “Come, and let us go
up to the mountain of the L-rd, to the House of the G-d of Jacob, and
He will teach us of His ways, and we will walk in His paths;” for out
of Zion shall Torah emerge, and the word of the L-rd from Jerusalem.

Ezekiel 37:24 – And My servant David shall be king over them, and one
shepherd shall shall be for them all; and they shall follow My
ordinances, and observe My statutes, and perform them.

Malachi 3:22/[4:4] – Remember the Torah of Moses My servant; that
which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel, statutes and
ordinances.

It is evident that Jeremiah's use of the term (brit khadashah), a
new covenant, does not involve the replacement of the Torah, which is
eternal. Rather, it signals a renewal of the original Sinai
covenant, which was declared to be everlasting, through its placement
within us along with the (sefer ha'brit), the Book of the Covenant,
to make them an inseparable part of the Jewish way of life.

Source: http://qumran.com/Refuting_Christianity/new_covenant_please_stand.htm

[NickHassan]

Hi GM,
The veil of the temple is torn from top to bottom.
You will find no shelter there.

[chosenone]

Hi Gollamudi.
Thanks for the information you provided. I really commend you for searching out all this, because I can see how in your eyes, you really are searching for the “truth”. Being a Jew, I can see your belief in God comes from your history of His (God) working with the His “chosen people”.
I am posting a portion of an explanation of the book of “Hebrews”, in the New Testament, that explains the part of the “new Covenant” God will be making with “the house of Israel” and the “house of Judah” in the future.
Many are mistaking the difference between the “Covenant of Grace” which all are under now, and the “New Covenant” God will be making with Israel and Judah in the future.
Here it is, I hope you will read it, and let me know what you think of it.

God Bless, Jerry.

Heb.6:1 to 10:27

1 The six rudiments which form the foundation which the Hebrews are exhorted to leave for more mature teaching are closely connected with the proclamation of the kingdom, and are not the substructure of present truth. Repentance and baptism are the keys to the kingdom, and are not for the body of Christ. Peter, at Pentecost, proclaims repentance and baptism to the Jews—perhaps to some who later received this epistle. Faith is the basis on which the present administration of grace is built. The Jews were zealous religionists. Their ritual was the dead works of which they repented when they turned to Messiah. “Faith on God” is probably the equivalent of our “belief in God”, that is believing that He is, rather than what He has said. Believing God, as in Abraham's case, leads to justification, a grace entirely absent from this list.

2 Paul did not put baptism in the foundation of his evangel. He insisted that Christ had not sent him to baptize, but to evangelize (1 Co.1:17). Now there is only one baptism—that in spirit, which unites us into one body (Eph.4:5). In the kingdom proclamation, however, baptism in water was essential.
The imposition of hands for the conveyance of spiritual benefits especially through the apostles is also a characteristic of the kingdom economy.
There seems to be no reference here to the “resurrection from among the dead”, but rather to resurrection in general, apart from which the kingdom cannot be set up. At that time will the saints in Israel awake and possess the kingdom promised to them in the prophets.
Eonian judgment characterizes the inception and progress of Messiah's reign. It begins with the severest judgments this earth has known.
These are the six foundation stones cast down by those who fell away among the Hebrews. They should have left them for maturity. Instead, they forsake them for apostasy. Instead of going back to Judaism, they would crucify again for themselves the Son of God.

4 This description applies only to those who participated in the Pente

341 Hebrews 6:11-7:10

costal blessings. They were enlightened, they' tasted the celestial gratuity, they became partakers of holy spirit, and God's declaration, and they only experienced the powers of the kingdom eon, and many of them fell aside. These blessings were based on their repentance, or change of mind, which was induced largely by the miracles which they saw. When the kingdom failed to appear, and its powers vanished, their repentance went also. Hence the impossibility of renewing it, for the means which produced it were no longer in evidence. Such a course is not possible in a day of grace, such as we live in. In place of repentance and pardon, we have faith and justification, which know no falling away, being entirely of grace, from first to last.

11 Brotherly kindness manifested in the service of the saints is several times commended in this epistle (10: 34, 13:1), and will be rewarded in accord with the promise of Mt.10:40-42.

12 “Through faith and patience” the promises may be enjoyed even by those who are actually strangers and expatriates on the earth.

13 That all are not to apostatize is evident from God's oath to Abraham. This truth is offered as an incentive to those who still remain faithful, to persevere to the consummation. It is only thus that the salvation of the Pentecostal saint was assured. The general fulfilment of God's oath to Abraham was beyond question, for God swore by the highest possible power to fulfil it, yet the special blessing of each one of his physical descendants depends, in some degree, not merely on their faith, but their faithfulness. This is the great distinguishing feature, which sinks it far below the grace which is lavished on us, sinners of the nations. We do not need this anchor of the soul, hence it is extended only to those who belong to Abraham by ties of flesh.

1 Melchizedek is notable chiefly for what is not recorded of him. There is no reason to believe that he was, personally, the mystical and miraculous character which is his as a picture of the priesthood of Christ. He doubtless was a man like other men, for God had some among the nations who had been brought to a close acquaintance with their Creator.
The Melchizedek priesthood should be studied in its contrasts with the Aaronic priesthood. Its greatest difference lies in the fact that it combines the office of king with that of priest. This is the ideal way. It was only because of the failure of Moses that Aaron was given a share in his mediatorial office. It is God's purpose that the nation of Israel shall be a kingdom of priests (Ex.19:6), a royal priesthood (1 Pet.2:8). They will rule the nations for God and bring the nations' offerings to God. So it behooves their Head to be both Priest and King.
The other great point of dissimilarity lies in the matter of succession. The continuance of the Aaronic priesthood was made a matter of descent, and nothing was so vital to a priest as his genealogy. He must be able to tell his father and his mother and trace his lineage clear back to Aaron or he could not even be a priest. And he must provide for this succession by marrying within the priestly caste. In notable contrast to this we have no recorded genealogy of Melchizedek whatever, no mention of father or mother, and no succession, for his death is carefully excluded from the fleeting glimpse we get of him on the pages of inspiration. These omissions are intentional, for only thus can his priesthood picture the priesthood of Christ, Who does not require a genealogy or a successor.

2 The writer fixes our attention on the significance and sequence of these titles. Righteousness must underlie peace in Christ's priestly work as elsewhere (Psa.72:3, 85:10; Isa.32:17, 9:4). So also justification is the ground of the infinitely greater favor of peace (Ro.5:1).

3 The Aaronic priesthood was a treadmill which never accomplished its object. The Melchizedek priesthood of Christ lasts during the millennium, and accomplishes its purpose, for no priest is found necessary in the new creation (Un.22:22), when God dwells with mankind (Un.21:3).

4 As further evidence of the superiority of the Melchizedek priesthood, our attention is directed to the tithe,

Hebrews 7:11-8:7 342

which, in Israel, was the special portion of the Levites. Abraham, himself, the progenitor of the nation, actually paid tithes to this priest, and in him, the whole Levitical priesthood paid tithes to another and higher order. Nor is this all, for Melchizedek blessed Abraham, and so bestowed his benediction on the Levitic succession. This alone shows that his order is distinctly superior to that of Aaron.

11 It would be very difficult for the Hebrews to acknowledge the failure of the Aaronic priesthood. Yet this is distinctly involved in the announcement of a priest after a different order. Had our Lord come of the family of Aaron, He would have been associated with an order which began in failure and which will never effect the reconciliation between God and His creatures which priesthood is inten
ded to bring about: Hence His genealogy proclaims Him Israel's King, but He ignores all genealogies in His priestly place. Instead, He has the much higher honor of being qualified for office by the divine oath, including an assurance that, unlike the Aaronic priesthood, there will be no regrets for the failure and insufficiency of His ministry.

23 If the Melchizedek priesthood should last forever (instead of for the eon) then it too, would come under the condemnation of never bringing anything to perfection or finality. Then there would be a temple and priesthood on the new earth; indeed, it would continue beyond the consummation, and form an insurmountable barrier between God and some of His creatures. Priesthood is a sign of estrangement; it vanishes when God is at peace with His people. Hence, though the Lord's life is indissoluble (7:16) and the priesthood inviolate (7:24), unbroken by death, it is always limited to one eon, beyond which there call be no priesthood, because there is no estrangement.

26 The glories of this Chief Priest refer to His relation to God, to men, to the law. He is knit to God by loving devotion. He is innocent of any tinge of malice toward men, and He is undefiled by a spot of moral defilement. He is separate from Sinners because of His exaltation to His office.

27 The fact that the sacrificial system under the law demanded sacrifices for the sins of the priests as well as for the people, shows that it was a weak and imperfect and temporary expedient. Add to this the fact that these sacrifices continued to be offered daily, and never brought any permanent relief, and we see clearly that it was never intended to do more than suggest the true Sacrifice, which the Son offered once, which needs no repetition. It is evident, therefore, that He could not have associated Himself with the Aaronic order without degrading His great sacrifice. They served among the shadows of the heavenly tabernacle. He entered the true.

1 The tabernacle and temple furniture did not include a seat. The high priest's work was never completed, hence, he never sat down in the holy places. In striking contrast, the Chief Priest of the new order has finished His work, and sits at the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens.
The “sum” is that the sanctuary is heaven itself: the Chief Priest is the Son of God. His priestly work began after His ascension (v.4). Aaronic priesthood was instituted at Sinai (Ex.24) after Israel had been redeemed; for the purpose of maintaining the people in the blessedness of redemption.

5 The tabernacle and its service were patterned after a heavenly original; It was not an exact copy, however, but an adumbration or shadow, merely giving the main outlines. The heavenly offerings seem to be mainly oblations or gifts, and probably had no sacrificial victims other than the great sacrifice of Christ. The earthly copy was given to teach the great lessons of God's righteousness and holiness, and man's unfitness and distance from Him, as well as the way of approach which is acceptable to Him until the true Sacrifice pours out His soul and makes an end of sins.

6 The heavenly tabernacle is not associated with the covenant and promises which came from Sinai along with the earthly model. Everything connected with the new Mediator is better. This is especially true of the new covenant which He will make when the kingdom commences.

343 Hebrews 8:8-9:12

8 Few phrases are so unfortunately confusing as “the New Testament”. The Greek word for “testament” and its Hebrew equivalent never carry the ordinary meaning of a will, or legal instrument for the disposal of property after death. They are close equivalents of our “covenant” or “contract”. To speak of the Greek Scriptures as “the New Testament”, and the Hebrew as “the Old Testament” is most misleading, because, as a matter of fact the new covenant is found in the “Old Testament”. Jeremiah gives it in full (Jer.31:31-34). It has never been in force yet and “New Testament times” will not come until after the time of great affliction when Jehovah calls Israel and Judah back to Himself. In truth, the new covenant is not for the nations at all, though, of course, a large section of the “New Testament” is especially for the nations.
The “old covenant” is not the Hebrew scriptures, but the compact made with Israel at Mount Sinai. It was two-sided. The people proposed to do their part and Jehovah engaged to do His. They promised to obey Him, but dismally failed to do so, consequently He could not fulfill His promises to bless them.
The new covenant which He will make with them after they have been restored to their land, and have received their Messiah, is radically different from the old. The people have no active part in it whatever. All depends on Jehovah. Hence it will not be a failure. The law that was written on stones will be written on their hearts. Instead of demanding a penalty for every infraction, He will be propitious. Instead of recalling their sins and lawlessnesses, He will blot them out. Instead of an “atonement” or shelter for sin made by the blood of he-goats and calves, the blood of Christ will put them completely away. At present we have the infinitely higher privilege of confidence in God Himself, not His promises or His covenants. The law is not inscribed on our hearts, but we were caused to die to the law through the body of Christ. We are not a regeneration but a new creation.

2 In the holy place of the tabernacle, just before the curtain which separated it from the holy of holies, were two pieces of furniture, the table with the bread on the north, the lampstand on the south (Ex.26:35, 40:22-25). These typified the great truths of communion and testimony. No sunlight could enter the holy places. All light was supplied by the holy oil, which typified the holy Spirit, thus indicating that all real knowledge of God must come, not through the light of nature, but through divine revelation. The bread is typical of Christ, the Bread which is God's delight and man's sustenance. Communion with God is possible only through Him.
The holy place speaks of man's need in approaching God. The holy of holies exhibits the higher truth of God's desire for worship. Sweet incense floated up to Him from the golden altar. His Presence abode above the ark of the covenant between the cherubim. The stone tablets of the covenant were securely hid from sight beneath the lid of the ark, which was the propitiatory or mercy seat. Here it is that Jehovah met the mediator of His people.
The word rendered “censer” is sometimes translated “golden altar”. But it is used twice in the LXX of a “censer in his hand” (2Chron.26:19; Ezek.8:1l ), and never of the golden altar. This was before the curtain, not in the holy of holies. Worship is not in view, so the altar is not mentioned.

6 The chief lesson of the tabernacle structure (as well as that of the temple) never seems to have entered the minds and hearts in Israel. A God Who hid Himself behind thick curtains, and Who forbade access into His presence except on rare occasions, Who divided the holy places into two compartments and dwelt alone in the furthest one, out of reach of all except the high priest once a year, makes it evident that the way to Him is far from open. And, as a consequence, the services based on these barriers must be impotent to clear the way, and were temporary measures, lasting only until Christ would crush all barriers by His surpassing sacrifices, and open the way of access to His presence.

Hebrews 9:13-10:6 344

13 This refers to the two great sin offerings of Lev.16 and Num.19. The victim was burned, the ashes preserved, and water that flowed over them availed to purify. This ordinance fills an important place in Israel's future as well as its past (Ezek.36:25).

15 This new covenant is for Israel and Judah only. The nations have no part in it at all. They never had the law and never will have it. They never had a divine serv
ice or a tabernacle, neither were the promises made to them. All of this is for the Hebrews only.

16 Covenants, in ancient times, were ratified by means of sacrifices. When Jehovah wished to confirm His covenant with Abram, five different animals were divided into halves, which were laid over against one another so that the contracting parties could pass in between them, thus indicating that they ratified the covenant (Gen.15:8-21). As this covenant was one of pure grace on God's part, Abram was not allowed to pass between the pieces. The symbols of Jehovah's presence passed through alone, thus confirming the covenant without conditions on the part of Abram. Until the victims have been slain no covenant was considered binding.

16 The rendering “testament” and “testator” has no concord whatever with the context. It is true that a testament is of no force while the testator is living, but that has no possible application here. If the covenant with Abram were a testament made by God, then, according to the reasoning, it has no force so long as God lives! The old covenant was confirmed by death-not the death of either party to the covenant, but by the sacrifices which the young men offered (Ex.24:5-8). The blood of these victims was sprinkled on the scroll of the covenant and on the people.

18 The old covenant, under which the people rashly contracted to do all that the law demanded, was dedicated with the blood of calves and he-goats. The new is inaugurated with the blood of Christ. which has power to fend all failure, and refuses all human help.

26 It is evident that Christ did not appear at “the end of the world”, nor, indeed, at the conclusion of the eons. Neither has sin been completely eliminated. Such, however, is the efficacy of His sacrifice, that we know that sin must eventually be banished from the universe. And we know also that this will be at the conclusion of the eons. Hence this somewhat complicated sentence has been rendered to this effect.

27 This is not a general statement concerning all men, but the men who have been in view continually, that is, the Levitical priests. The word judgment has no reference to the judgment of mankind for sin, but the setting to rights of those cases in Israel which continued until the death of the high priest. The innocent man-slayer lived in the city of refuge until the death of the great priest (Nu.35:22-29). Then he might return to his patrimony. This was his “judgment”. The parallel demands that this judgment correspond with the salvation which will come to those who are awaiting Christ. He, the great Chief Priest, has died, and in due time Israel, the man-slayer, shall return to the land of his possession.

28 This appearance of Christ refers to His return to Israel. He will bring salvation to all, whether they watch or are drowsy (1Thess.5:10) when He comes for us. But to Israel He brings salvation to those awaiting Him. Just as the high priest entered the holy of holies on the great day of atonement and came out to bless the waiting throng, so Christ has entered the heavenly sanctuary and will bring a benediction when He comes.

1 The sacrifices under the law were but dim figures of the great Sacrifice. They made atonement, that is, a shelter for sin. The offering up of Christ made a real propitiation, for it put away the sins which had been covered by the blood of bulls and goats. Atonement covered sin, pardon put it away, but justification, which we enjoy, goes far beyond both. The Hebrews were not justified.

5 The unbeliever's objection that the God of Israel was a terrible God Who delighted in the blood of slain beasts, is here directly denied. The whole sacrificial system, not only as an

345 Hebrews 10:7-39

atonement for sin, but also as a means of worship by whole burnt offerings, gave Him no pleasure in itself, but only as it was typical of the true. The physical perfection of an animal was nothing to Him except as a reminder of the moral and spiritual perfection of the One Who came to do His will. The blood of beasts could cover sins, but had no power to put them away, yet it foretold the true Sacrifice, and the sufferings which suffice to offset all sins-covered or uncovered-and eventually to justify all who have committed them as well as to vindicate God for the presence of sin in the world. These grander results are not, of course, in view in this epistle.

7 So Christ “offers Himself flawless to God”, not at the cross, but on coming into the world, as the Israelite presented his sacrifice at the door of the tabernacle (Heb.9:14; Lev.1:1-5).

11 The great difference between the Levitical sacrifices and that of their Antitype is graphically brought before us in the action of the chief priests and the inaction of Christ. Indeed, had the sacrifices of the law been really efficacious, like that of Christ, there never would have been a priesthood and a sacrificial system. Moses would have offered one sacrifice, such as that at the inauguration of the covenant (Ex.24:5), and, there being no further necessity for sacrifice, there would have been no need for a priesthood. The Aaronic priesthood is built on its own inadequacy. Its continuous round of unavailing ritual knew no goal, brooked no cessation, and gave no rest. No priest was allowed to sit in the holy places, for his work was never final. In these things the type is in contrast with the antitype, for Christ is seated in the holy of holies so far as His priesthood is concerned.

15 Under the new covenant, when Judah and Israel are restored to their land, the sin offering will be offered again (Eze.43:22), but it is evident that it will not be for those who have been pardoned.

19 The “recently slain way” is a reference to the path into the temple. On either side were the bodies of the sacrifices which had just been slain, and offered to Jehovah. It, however, was a dead way, and no one but a priest dared enter upon it. The way now lies through the death and resurrection of Christ, hence is a living way, though recently slain. In the past even priests dared not venture through the curtain, behind which the Shekinah glory dwelt. Now, however, the Hebrews of every tribe have access, not only into the outer court of the priests, but into the holy place and into the holy of holies, where the high priest went but once a year. He went with fear and trembling, but they are invited to enter with assurance, because of the efficacy of this sprinkled blood and the cleanliness which comes through His word (Jn.15:3). It is as worshipers they are to approach. This epistle speaks of Christ's priesthood, and not of that of His people.

27 Under the law, one who sinned “presumptuously” (Nu.15:30), or, as the Hebrew has it, “with a high hand”, was to be cut off from among his people, because he had despised the word of Jehovah and broken His commandment. The man who gathered sticks on the sabbath day was stoned to death (Nu.15:32-36). The voluntary sin here referred to is doubtless the repudiation of the truth and apostasy from the faith. The faith of the Hebrews, having been founded on the powers and signs which were given as a token of the near approach of the kingdom, was sorely tried when these signs ceased and the kingdom did not come. But those who drew back could not do so without reproaching God and trampling on the Son of God and inviting the fiery jealousy of Jehovah. For such there is no sin offering, since they refuse the only Sacrifice that is of any avail. They are calling down the vengeance of God.

How great is the contrast between these Hebrews and those who came under the ministry of Paul! Their faith did not fail for lack of evidence, because it was never founded on it (2Co.5:7). They come so completely under the dominion of grace, that persistence in sin would only increase the outflowing of favor (Ro.6:1). We are beyond the sphere of condemnation (Ro.8:1). The Hebrews were never introduced into such grace as this, for their destiny is the kingdom.

[gollamudi]

Quote (chosenone @ May 08 2010,06:20)

Hi Gollamudi.   Thanks for the information you provided.  I really commend you for searching out all this, because I can see how in your eyes, you really are searching for the “truth”.  Being a Jew, I can see your belief in God comes from your history of His (God) working with the His “chosen people”.   I am posting a portion of an explanation of the book of “Hebrews”, in the New Testament, that explains the part of the “new Covenant” God will be making with “the house of Israel” and the “house of Judah” in the future.   Many are mistaking the difference between the “Covenant of Grace” which all are under now, and the “New Covenant” God will be making with Israel and Judah in the future.   Here it is, I hope you will read it, and let me know what you think of it. God Bless,  Jerry.

Hi brother Jerry,
Thanks for your lengthy and detailed post on New covenant. I also agree with you on the new covenant is meant for future not the past. But the problem of interpreting Jesus death as an atonement for sins of Israel I can't agree. No where the Jewish scriptures meant of human sacrifice for redemption of sins. Infact in the Messianic kingdom Israel will resume the animal sacrifice like in the time of First and Second Temple period. It is clearly mentioned in the last chapters of Ezekiel. The idea of the writer of Hebrews(book) is purely speculation but not based on Hebrew scriptures. God will save His people Israel with the New covenant by writing His laws on their heart and giving them the ability to obey His commandments but not by believing Jesus or his death as an atonement. Please read my lengthy post above for details.

Hope you will see this truth.
Peace to you
Adam

[NickHassan]

Hi GM,
If you are not a Jew how can all this relate to you?
Prodigal sons need the Son of God.

[gollamudi]

Hi brother Nick,
I hope we are not finding salvation here in this forum. We are only debating on the Christian scriptures of their reliability. Whether a Jew or Gentile it matters when we debate on the scriptures for their validity.

Peace to you
Adam

[Author]

Posts