Some things about the law that need explaining.

[Nehemiah6]

Hebrews 8:13
By calling this covenant “new,” He (Jesus) has made the first one
obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

Since I use the KJV this is stated as follows: 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.

The Greek text is identical in both the Critical and the Received Texts:
CRITICAL TEXT
ἐν τῷ λέγειν Καινήν πεπαλαίωκεν τὴν πρώτην, τὸ δὲ παλαιούμενον καὶ γηράσκον ἐγγὺς ἀφανισμοῦ.
RECEIVED TEXT
ἐν τῷ λέγειν, Καινὴν πεπαλαίωκε τὴν πρώτην. τὸ δὲ παλαιούμενον καὶ γηράσκον, ἐγγὺς ἀφανισμοῦ.

πεπαλαίωκεν τὴν πρώτην = He has made the first obsolete (is correct).

According to Thayer's Greek Lexicon πεπαλαίωκεν (pepalaioken) means "to declare a thing to be old and so about to be abrogated".

To abrogate something means to declare it null and void, to annul, to abolish by authoritative action.

abrogate
verb
ab·ro·gate | \ ˈa-brə-ˌgāt
abrogated; abrogating
transitive verb
formal : to abolish by authoritative action : ANNUL abrogate a treaty

So when God and Christ declared that a New Covenant had come into existence, they abolished the Old Covenant. And the proof that it was abolished was displayed within the temple at Jerusalem on the day Christ died. The veil of the temple which separated the Holy of Holies from the Holy Place was supernaturally torn from top to bottom. The destruction of the temple in 70 AD finalized this abrogation.

This meant that the Levitical priesthood, temple worship, temple sacrifices, and all ceremonies associated with the Jewish feasts and festivals had come to an end. Why? Because Christ made ONE SACRIFICE FOR SINS FOREVER.

Anyone now who reverts back to the Old Covenant is in fact resisting God and rebelling against the New Covenant. And that is the status of unsaved Jews. As Stephen told the unrepentant Jews "Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost".

 

[Rosemaryx]

who said the man was alive?
jesus point was even if they showed the man, let he who has no sin cast the first stone

John 8:1-5
1But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.
2Early in the morning He went back into the temple courts. All the people came to Him, and He sat down to teach them. 3The scribes and Pharisees, however, brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before them 4and said, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such a woman. So what do You say?”

He must of been alive because she was caught in the act...Unless he died while they took her off to Jesus?
...xox...

 

[Blik]

Hebrews 8:13
By calling this covenant “new,” He (Jesus) has made the first one
obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

To your mind, all the promises the Lord gave when the Lord told us there were blessings (apart from salvation) in obedience is obsolete, gone, done with. The Lord God I worship did not take those promises away from me when God gave me the new covenant. I don't believe your God is the one true God, he is an idol you have created with your own mind.

 

[ewq1938]

According to the law she should have been put to death.

Not with two or more witnesses and were no witnesses present plus the man would have to be executed also and he wasn't there. There was no legal way to stone her which was entire point. It was fake. Adultery never happened which is why there was no man who also committed adultery and no witnesses. It was a set up to trick Jesus into making the wrong decision but he knew the law better than anyone and couldn't be fooled.

 

[echoChrist]

You have not even had time to defend. You came in attacking

this is a discussion forum, not a defend my belief forum

To your mind, all the promises the Lord gave when the Lord told us there were blessings (apart from salvation) in obedience is obsolete, gone, done with. The Lord God I worship did not take those promises away from me when God gave me the new covenant. I don't believe your God is the one true God, he is an idol you have created with your own mind.

As long as your justified in the Lords eyes that’s all that matters.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Not with two or more witnesses and were no witnesses present plus the man would have to be executed also and he wasn't there. There was no legal way to stone her which was entire point. It was fake. Adultery never happened which is why there was no man who also committed adultery and no witnesses. It was a set up to trick Jesus into making the wrong decision but he knew the law better than anyone and couldn't be fooled.

Yet Jesus told her he did not condemn her either. And told her to go and do not do it again

 

[Guojing]

Since I use the KJV this is stated as follows: 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.

The Greek text is identical in both the Critical and the Received Texts:
CRITICAL TEXT
ἐν τῷ λέγειν Καινήν πεπαλαίωκεν τὴν πρώτην, τὸ δὲ παλαιούμενον καὶ γηράσκον ἐγγὺς ἀφανισμοῦ.
RECEIVED TEXT
ἐν τῷ λέγειν, Καινὴν πεπαλαίωκε τὴν πρώτην. τὸ δὲ παλαιούμενον καὶ γηράσκον, ἐγγὺς ἀφανισμοῦ.

πεπαλαίωκεν τὴν πρώτην = He has made the first obsolete (is correct).

According to Thayer's Greek Lexicon πεπαλαίωκεν (pepalaioken) means "to declare a thing to be old and so about to be abrogated".

To abrogate something means to declare it null and void, to annul, to abolish by authoritative action.

abrogate
verb
ab·ro·gate | \ ˈa-brə-ˌgāt
abrogated; abrogating
transitive verb
formal : to abolish by authoritative action : ANNUL abrogate a treaty

So when God and Christ declared that a New Covenant had come into existence, they abolished the Old Covenant. And the proof that it was abolished was displayed within the temple at Jerusalem on the day Christ died. The veil of the temple which separated the Holy of Holies from the Holy Place was supernaturally torn from top to bottom. The destruction of the temple in 70 AD finalized this abrogation.

This meant that the Levitical priesthood, temple worship, temple sacrifices, and all ceremonies associated with the Jewish feasts and festivals had come to an end. Why? Because Christ made ONE SACRIFICE FOR SINS FOREVER.

Anyone now who reverts back to the Old Covenant is in fact resisting God and rebelling against the New Covenant. And that is the status of unsaved Jews. As Stephen told the unrepentant Jews "Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost".

Have you addressed this already?

https://christianchat.com/threads/some-things-about-the-law-that-need-explaining.196401/post-4447274

 

[ewq1938]

Yet Jesus told her he did not condemn her either.

Because there was no evidence of any guilt.

And told her to go and do not do it again

Sure, a wise thing to say to someone because all are sinners but this doesn't confirm the claim that she was caught in Adultery to be true. If that had actually happened the man and woman would have been stoned and no one would have been taken to some Jewish teacher who was not even a judge. I maintain entire thing was fabricated as a test in order to try to get Christ to say she should be stoned.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I don't believe your God is the one true God, he is an idol you have created with your own mind.

Another false accusation against another Christian. Since you do not have a leg to stand on, and are thoroughly confused, all you do is make such ridiculous accusations.

 

[Nehemiah6]

So if you do believe the church is neither of the 2 houses, why do you still think the New Covenant is made with the church when Hebrews 8:8 stated otherwise.

Hebrew 8:8 is a quotation from Jeremiah 31:31-34. The very fact that it is quoted in Hebrews confirms that it is being applied to the Church, since Paul was writing to the Hebrew Christians within the Church at that time. Its ultimate fulfillment is shown in the prophecy of Ezekiel, which will become a reality after the Second Coming of Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 is preceded by Hebrews 8:6, which is in the present tense: But now hath He [Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the Mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

The book of Hebrews describes the PRESENT high priestly ministry of Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary, since He is PRESENTLY the Mediator of the "better covenant" (which is the New Covenant).

How is it that none of this is clear to you when Hebrews is clearly revealing that the New Covenant is already in place?

 

[Guojing]

Hebrew 8:8 is a quotation from Jeremiah 31:31-34. The very fact that it is quoted in Hebrews confirms that it is being applied to the Church, since Paul was writing to the Hebrew Christians within the Church at that time. Its ultimate fulfillment is shown in the prophecy of Ezekiel, which will become a reality after the Second Coming of Christ.

Hebrews 8:8 is preceded by Hebrews 8:6, which is in the present tense: But now hath He [Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the Mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

The book of Hebrews describes the PRESENT high priestly ministry of Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary, since He is PRESENTLY the Mediator of the "better covenant" (which is the New Covenant).

How is it that none of this is clear to you when Hebrews is clearly revealing that the New Covenant is already in place?

Paul is not the author of Hebrews, but I do understand its a popular view.

So even though you agree we are not the House of Israel nor the House of Judah, you still believe the new covenant is to us, when Hebrews 8:8 tells you who it will be established with instead?

Alright then.

 

[Blik]

Hebrews 8:13
By calling this covenant “new,” He (Jesus) has made the first one
obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear.

This is why I think you are wrong that the entire old covenant has been done away with, that would mean that the promises God made were done away with, I don't think we have the right to say that about the Lord. I am assuming that by quoting scripture telling us of how much in the old covenant is obsolete, you are making a statement that the entire thing is cancelled.

This is the old covenant, found in Deuteronomy: Duet: 28: 1 “If you indeed[a] obey the Lord your God and are careful to observe all his commandments I am giving[b] you today, the Lord your God will elevate you above all the nations of the earth. 2 All these blessings will come to you in abundance[c] if you obey the Lord your God:

We are told it is obsolete, cancelled. But if we read on in scripture, we find there is something about it that is obsolete, and the new covenant is better. We must find, then, what is obsolete and cancelled by checking all other scripture. Here is the new covenant found in Jerimiah.

Please note that these blessings do not include salvation, for salvation has always been only through Christ.


Jer. 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: 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:

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.

This does not say God made his promises in the old covenant obsolete and old, in fact it states the new covenant also gives the law. But the law is put in our hearts, and under the old covenant the law was given in stone and rules. The way of delivering the law, then has changed, but the law did not change.

Fact is the new testament repeats that under the new covenant, under Christ, we have blessings when we accept the spirit of Christ. Disobedience is NOT part of the spirit of Christ.

Fruits of the Spirit Gal. 5: 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires.

All of this was to Israel, not the gentiless. We are told in Galatians 3: "If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise.

Under the promise we are given blessings for obedience just as we are given eternal life through faith in Christ. Cancelling the way the law is delivered to us did NOT cancel those blessings.

 

[Guojing]

This is why I think you are wrong that the entire old covenant has been done away with, that would mean that the promises God made were done away with, I don't think we have the right to say that about the Lord. I am assuming that by quoting scripture telling us of how much in the old covenant is obsolete, you are making a statement that the entire thing is cancelled.

This is the old covenant, found in Deuteronomy: Duet: 28: 1 “If you indeed[a] obey the Lord your God and are careful to observe all his commandments I am giving[b] you today, the Lord your God will elevate you above all the nations of the earth. 2 All these blessings will come to you in abundance[c] if you obey the Lord your God:

We are told it is obsolete, cancelled. But if we read on in scripture, we find there is something about it that is obsolete, and the new covenant is better. We must find, then, what is obsolete and cancelled by checking all other scripture. Here is the new covenant found in Jerimiah.

Please note that these blessings do not include salvation, for salvation has always been only through Christ.


Jer. 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: 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:

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.

This does not say God made his promises in the old covenant obsolete and old, in fact it states the new covenant also gives the law. But the law is put in our hearts, and under the old covenant the law was given in stone and rules. The way of delivering the law, then has changed, but the law did not change.

Fact is the new testament repeats that under the new covenant, under Christ, we have blessings when we accept the spirit of Christ. Disobedience is NOT part of the spirit of Christ.

Fruits of the Spirit Gal. 5: 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires.

All of this was to Israel, not the gentiless. We are told in Galatians 3: "If you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise.

Under the promise we are given blessings for obedience just as we are given eternal life through faith in Christ. Cancelling the way the law is delivered to us did NOT cancel those blessings.

we In the body of Christ are not given the same physical blessings that Israel had, for obedience

Ours is spiritual, in the heavens

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Because there was no evidence of any guilt.

if she was innocent he would not have to say this, and he would never have said go and sin no more (don’t do it again)

Sure, a wise thing to say to someone because all are sinners but this doesn't confirm the claim that she was caught in Adultery to be true. If that had actually happened the man and woman would have been stoned and no one would have been taken to some Jewish teacher who was not even a judge. I maintain entire thing was fabricated as a test in order to try to get Christ to say she should be stoned.

Um no, while yes we are all sinners, to tell her and never commit a sin again would be foolish, because he knows she could not do that.

he would not go and tell someone to do something they could not do to begin with

 

[posthuman]

Not with two or more witnesses and were no witnesses present plus the man would have to be executed also and he wasn't there. There was no legal way to stone her which was entire point. It was fake. Adultery never happened which is why there was no man who also committed adultery and no witnesses. It was a set up to trick Jesus into making the wrong decision but he knew the law better than anyone and couldn't be fooled.

of course it was a trap. they had a plan on how to accuse Him no matter how they thought He would answer - but His answer astounded them & laid bare their devices. that's how these traps all played out.

for example: remember when they thought they had Him trapped, seeing His disciples picking and eating grain, technically working a field, on sabbath? they clearly had a plan to accuse Him: if He corrects or fails to correct His disciples, they will say He isn't master of His own house, a poor teacher - and surely He won't openly speak against the sabbath, but if He does then it would be an overwhelming victory for them because they will have proof He speaks against the law. their goal is to discredit and shame Him because the people are listening to Him rather than them, and they lust for the people's ear & adoration. so the plot is always this: at least to have a reason to convince the people to turn away from Him, at best to have a reason to put Him to death.
but remember what He answered - He cited two examples in the law of the law being broken but the perpetrators being guiltless: David & his men eating the holy bread meant only for priests, and the priest themselves desecrating sabbath weekly by design because the law itself requires them to work, even, to work double the work they would do during the other 6 days.
see how this destroyed all of the accusations they had ready?

the same thing - if John 8 is genuine - happens with the woman they bring before Him. they believe that however He answers them, they have an accusation against Him. think what they expected Him to say, how they planned to turn each possibility against Him.

these are very clever people who have planned this. they said she was caught in the act - so if they had no witnesses, they would be making themselves liars. not a good outcome for them; very unlikely. the law doesn't say you can't execute one sinner because another sinner escaped. not a plausible explanation. His answer - that whichever among them is not guilty - has no relationship to there having been no sin involved, and He explicitly tells her sin no more, as though she certainly had sin. so the idea that there was no adultery, in addition to having the same flaw in that it would condemn the accusers to death ((have a look at Deuteronomy 19:15-21)) and openly prove them to be liars ((Exodus 20:16)), is intractable on the basis of Christ's own response.

i think it's more likely that the woman was a prostitute or concubine passed around the pharisees and scribes, and that they had set her up to 'catch her' in order to trade her life ((they had every intention to kill her)) for a contrivance to make accusation against Jesus.
just an opinion.

 

[notuptome]

Yet Jesus told her he did not condemn her either. And told her to go and do not do it again

Her accusers left and could no longer accuse her so Christ acted in mercy and forgave her. She was according to the passage was with her because she was taken in the very act yet they did not demand that the male participant be stoned as well even though the law prescribed that very remedy.

Those who will not have mercy will have judgment.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[posthuman]

Paul is not the author of Hebrews, but I do understand its a popular view.

So even though you agree we are not the House of Israel nor the House of Judah, you still believe the new covenant is to us, when Hebrews 8:8 tells you who it will be established with instead?

Alright then.

hi -- you never did answer why you think a covenant expressly including Israel, with language expressly inclusive of the people broken into scattered groups, must be exclusively with them -- especially in light of such things as Hosea 2 (("in that day" a covenant expressly with Israel and expressly with all living souls on earth)) and Zechariah 11:10-14 ((the breaking of the "covenant" expressly with "all people" directly & clearly tied to the cross and the second staff being called the brotherhood of Judah & Israel))?
. . . ?

 

[Blackpowderduelist]

To your mind, all the promises the Lord gave when the Lord told us there were blessings (apart from salvation) in obedience is obsolete, gone, done with. The Lord God I worship did not take those promises away from me when God gave me the new covenant. I don't believe your God is the one true God, he is an idol you have created with your own mind.

He fulfilled them in Christ, Jesus.

 

[posthuman]

Her accusers left and could no longer accuse her so Christ acted in mercy and forgave her. She was according to the passage was with her because she was taken in the very act yet they did not demand that the male participant be stoned as well even though the law prescribed that very remedy.

Those who will not have mercy will have judgment.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

if the man was a Roman soldier they could accuse Jesus against the empire if He said he should also be stoned. the Jews were not allowed under the imperial law to put anyone to death themselves - so no matter which among them He said should be first, they would be able to accuse Him to Pilate of being a rebel, but if He says she should not be stoned, He speaks against the law and they could accuse Him to the people.
if this is the plot then they are all guilty of both of their intended accusations already, because they didn't bring the man to Him - so they were ignoring the law - and they were intending to kill her - in rebellion against Rome. they would be able to spin either thing to the people; oh the tyranny of Rome that lets the guilty soldier go, or oh, we uphold the law but Jesus disregards it.

just speculation

 

[Blackpowderduelist]

The old covenant if fulfilled, and we are freed fr the law. However there are things that we learn from the law. We know what sin is by the law. In the law God pronounced to us what evil is. We know by the law, all forms of sex out side of the confines of marriage is sin, even though we don't stone people to death according to the law. There are examples of people who claim to be Christian that reject that these sexual immoralities are sin because they reject that the law teaches us anything. I read an article about a so called pastor and his wife who are swingers and claim to be using this as a contact to spread the gospel. And then you all know the number of so called churches that accept lbgt agenda in their church. All rejecting that the morals set down by the law are sin because we no longer have the law.