Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Does Heb.8:13 say N.Cov. hasn't started? | Heb 8:13 | Emmaus | 135126 | ||
rut, "Does Heb.8:13 say NewCovenant hasn't started? " No, it says the Old Covenant id fading away. The New Covenant was established with the death of Jesus on the cross. The Old Covenant lingered and was fading when Hewbrews was written. It's pactical application in the Temples sacrificial system ended in 70 A.D. with the destruction of the Temple by the Romans.Hebrews speaks of the Temple sacrifices in the present tense indicatiog at the time Hebrews was written the Temple was still in existence and the letter therefore being written before 70 A.D. Emmaus |
||||||
2 | The Old Covenant lingers? | Heb 8:13 | Aixen7z4 | 135301 | ||
This different opinion on Hebrews 8:13 is reminiscent of the difficulty many have with 1 Corinthians 13:8. The thing was going to end. But when? In the first place, who said it would end? Was it the person who wrote to the Hebrews? Or was it Jeremiah? (If you say it was God then ask whom did he use to reveal it). What was supposed to end? Was it the sacrifice of lambs only? Or was it the entire Old Covenant? When was it to end? Was it supposed to go on for another seventy years after the cross? Or was it to end abruptly at the cross? The writer to the Hebrews was referring to the fact that God had spoken. He was saying that’s the way it is whenever God speaks of old and new. “ When God speaks of a new covenant, it means he has made the first one obsolete. It is now out of date and ready to be put aside” (NLT). “When God speaks of a new [covenant or agreement], He makes the first one obsolete (out of use). And what is obsolete (out of use and annulled because of age) is ripe for disappearance and to be dispensed with altogether” (AMP). The point would be moot by now if we could decide that the Old Covenant has certainly finally gone by now, two thousand years after the cross. But alas! There is no consensus as to that. There are those who still keep the Sabbath, abstain from meats, pay the tithe, etc. Please note that someone is asking, based on the same verse, whether there are ten commandments now in force, or nine. There are Messianic Jewish churches now, and it is not a secret what they do there. But I visited a Protestant church not long ago and saw an entire observation of the Feast of Tabernacles. When will that Old Covenant die? As always, it is unfortunate when the original questioner disappears without responding to the answers that have been given. I wonder what rut and disciplerami understand by now? Is it possible they still think the New Covenant has not even started as yet? |
||||||
3 | The Old Covenant lingers? | Heb 8:13 | kalos | 135343 | ||
Brother Aixen: I count 13 questions in the text of your Question. Unless the questions are rhetorical, it might be more suitable to this forum to post one question at a time. That would make it easier for us to answer. No criticism of or offense to you is intended. I merely offer a suggestion that may help readers to answer the question(s). Grace and peace, Kalos |
||||||
4 | The Old Covenant lingers? | Heb 8:13 | Aixen7z4 | 135367 | ||
Thank you for pointing out that a question can be rhetorical. Even when it is not, a question may be designed, not to show ignorance, or to request information, but to encourage the reader to think. Don’t you think so? For example, I might have asked, “Are you sure the Old Covenant did not fade away in the moment that the New Covenant came into effect, at the cross?” The immediate response might have been a defensive “Yes, I am”. With the thoughts generated by all the other questions, the reader might have come, hopefully, to a more reasoned conclusion in his own mind. Might it not work that way? Jesus had a way of asking questions that did not suggest he was lacking in knowledge and needing to be informed. For example: Once while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, saying, “What think ye of Christ? Whose son is he?” They say unto him, “The Son of David”. He said unto them, “How then does David in spirit call him Lord, saying, ‘The LORD said unto my Lord, “Sit thou on my right hand, till I make your enemies thy footstool?”’ If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?” In all of this, Jesus was not seeking information, but making a point. At other times he might ask, “Which of you convinces me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?” Or he might ask, “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keeps the law? Why do you go about to kill me?” Questions like that can cause a person to think, don’t you think? In this case, my barrage of questions was meant to ask Emmaus, “Won’t you reconsider the combination of statements, that ‘The New Covenant was established with the death of Jesus on the cross. (But) The Old Covenant lingered and was fading when Hebrews was written’”? Surely that would mean that the two Covenants coexisted for a while. I would hope his response would be, not Yes or No but, “Let me think about it”. He might think about it in light of the other facts submitted: that there are those who think the two Covenants coexist to this day, what with tithing and Sabbath keeping and all. He might even recall, without my saying it, that Jesus said you do not put new wine into old wineskins. Sometimes a barrage of questions does not work. But it could cause a reader to think. It could cause him to think more deeply about the issue, don’t you think? |
||||||
5 | The Old Covenant lingers? | Heb 8:13 | kalos | 135370 | ||
Aixen: I agree with you. There are questions, or even a barrage of questions, that could cause a person to think -- to reconsider his position on a doctrine or issue. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||