It has been my experience that the answer is no. We all know and understand that HaShem is order, and that all things that truly show His Light and Love are as well. I ask that if you can't follow the simple request placed before you, please don't post on this thread.
Any debate on the Laws of HaShem, goes off the deep end, with passage after passage being posted. In just one post we may find as many as 15 if not more. This is an unproductive way to handle this, or any topic. As it can leave any one wishing to reply, with little option, Leave a post that is pages long, or leave a vague post filled with even more passages and little substance. This is what leads to endless debate with no answers, as well talking in circles.
For this reason, it is always best to look at ONLY ONE PASSAGE at a time. Now once that passage is called up, Both sides must look at it from both sides. i.e. Be ready and willing to argue the points you don't follow.
If the only thing we do is push one side of a topic, we fail to really look at the other side, and in most cases, fail to even hear the other side. So here is my propose, it is open to every one that truly wishes to open their hearts and minds to TRUTH. Not my truth, not your truth, and not your churches truth. Rather BIBLICAL TRUTH.
As almost all study of OT vs NT is centered around the Law of HaShem, (Know here after as TORAH) the first thing that must be found is, "How valid is Torah today?" Not an easy answer for many.
So here we go.
When it comes to Torah, the one passage that comes up more than other is Mat. 5:17. So lets look closely at this passage.
(NLT) Mat 5:17 “Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose.
(KJ same passage) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
One must always take note of the passage opening. Here we are told not to think that something is Yeshua's reason for coming. From that we are safe to say that anything that follows, (until a change of topic) is what we shouldn't see as coming topass. After all He just THINK NOT, or in my words, (Don't put words in my mouth, or forget the important words I use.)
So let's do a full brake down of this passage. Looking at from both sides.
First we have THINK NOT, or Don't misunderstand. Both give the same thought behind the words. Just tell us not to entertain the idea that Yeshua came to do any of the following. So what is it he didn't come to do?
(KJ ) I am come to destroy the laws or the prophets:
(NLT) I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets.
If we read this passage for what it tells us, rather than what we wish it to say, we find that the Torah, and the Prophets are placed together. From this one should conclude that they work together, and we can not remove one from this passage with any hope of keeping the whole context of the passage.
Also, if we remove any part of this, then apply the new contextual meaning to the full passage, as well as any that may follow, do we not teach a lie, based on what we hope is true? SO any teaching on this passage must hold true to both Torah and prophets. With this understanding, one must walk carefully. If we say Yeshua removed the Law, nailed it to the cross, and so on, We also say that He has removed the prophecies that have not been fulfilled. Like His second coming, Judgment of all man kind, and many others.
(KJ) I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
(NLT) No, I came to accomplish their purpose
Now the most common word to be pushed by them that stand in opposition to Torah is the word FULFILL. So lets take a look at that word.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fulfill Has this to say.
a : to put into effect : execute He fulfilled his pledge to cut taxes.
b : to meet the requirements of (a business order) Their order for more TVs was promptly fulfilled.
c : to measure up to : satisfy She hasn't yet fulfilled the requirements needed to graduate.
d : to bring to an end she came to install herself and fulfill her time at the house— Willa Cather
2a : to develop the full potentialities of He has a lot of talent, but he hasn't really fulfilled his potential.
b : to convert into reality a sense of the failure of life to fulfill its ultimate expectations— Leslie Rees
3 archaic : to make full : fill her subtle, warm, and golden breath … fulfills him with beatitude— Alfred Tennyson
Now in this we find both sides, we find that it can mean to being to an end, yet we must ask, has it all been brought to an end? Are we wrong to say Yeshua will be coming back? After all He has brought to an end the Prophets, then that would also mean all prophecy has been fulfilled, or removed as they no longer hold meaning. i.e. there is no need for them.
Yet if we now look at this from a more contextual view, we know He must return for the WORD to hold truth. After all if any part of what the WORD tells us is not true, then we place our salvation in the hands of sin. Just saying.
We also know from the fact that Yeshua must come again, we must understand that He is still working to FULFILL scripture.
On the flip side.
At best I can here, so I leave something our please let me know.
This passage is clear that Jesus FULFILLED the Law, nailed it the cross, and removed it. He know that man kind can not live up to it's standards, and that to be held to that standard would leave us all devoid of hope. The passage is clear in that it tells us Jesus removed law. As is clear in your own use of Webster.
The SDA has followed the same form of teachings for close to close to 100 years
End quote
The earliest >>>American<<< full preterist work was 'The Second Advent of the Lord Jesus Christ: A Past Event', which was written in 1845 by Robert Townley.
So we are now about even on that sooo....roughly 175 years now. .
Glad you are so set on showing how wrong I am and how right you are. It at lest shows consistency. Just as you not answering what I ask does. Are you starting to see why we should move on and drop this topic?
As we move on to the last feast, we find once more that this is a pilgrimage feast. One of the happiest in Israel. (Note I didn't say the happiest.)
Sukkot, known by many names though Booths is the most common. It is also called ingathering for more than one reason. True it is a harvest fest, and as noted with the other feast, it to has a prophetic fulfillment. One that no matter when you look at in history, has never been fulfilled in history, until it started in earnest around the the late 1800's.
Here is a web sight that will give more info, if anyone wished to look at it.
Today or rather in the late 1900's Israel and other nations pulled together to help Jews from around the world return to Israel. An act that is fulfilling the following.
Ps. 107, Ezek. 20:34, Neh. 1:8-9, and Deut. 30:1-5.
Note that I say it is FULFILLING, this is an on going thing, and though not every Hebrew person will make Aliyah. In 1950 I think it was Israel passed The Law Of Return. Making it easy for it's people to return.
We can go on and on about this was done at this time or that, yet in the end we are forced to seek in our own hearts the truth that is the Word.
Foot note.
How many know that Deut. 29:22-23 was fulfilled by Mark Twain?
As one side follows that it is being fulfilled in our time, there are 2 other teachings I know of on this.
The first, takes the passages given, placing then not on earth rather in Heaven. They teach that Israel was rejected, being replaced the church. (Personal note... Most churches that teach this, may not say it out load, yet they do in other ways. "It is our church that replaced them!!!!")
There is abundant Scripture to back their ideas, that are also used in one other teaching I know of. In it we are told that Yeshua handed the church Israels blessing, and withheld the curses of the Abrahamic Covenant.
Some of the passages used are, Ps.9:11, Gal. 4:28-29 and 5:1. More tomorrow I hope.
22 So that the generation to come of your children that shall rise up after you, and the stranger that shall come from a far land, shall say, when they see the plagues of that land, and the sicknesses which the Lord hath laid upon it;
23 And that the whole land thereof is brimstone, and salt, and burning, that it is not sown, nor beareth, nor any grass groweth therein, like the overthrow of Sodom, and Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim, which the Lord overthrew in his anger, and in his wrath:
Mark Twain's book was written in satire . It was meant to be humorous. He spoke of weeping at Adam's grave because he had not met him as one example to Or how he saw the house of the Wandering Jew (who has broken his wanderings to come back to it )
1867 was a milestone year in Western interactions with Palestine. It marked the beginning of Charles Warren’s groundbreaking excavations in Jerusalem for the Palestine Exploration Fund. This was the same time Twain embarked on the Quaker City for the Mediterranean.
Twain visited in September, when there has usually been no rain for months, and everything is brown and dry and dead. In March and April the ground is lush and carpeted with flowers and vegetation.
However, in his book (and I am unsure how much time he spent there) Twain describes a fertile landscape. In the case of the supposedly barren Mounts of Blessing and Curses with the contrast of the surrounding productive lands of Nablus .
In one of his notebooks he observed that prophecies of the desolation of cities were meaningless, since all cities decline sooner or later: “It seems to me that the prophets fooled away their time when they prophesied the destruction of the cities — old Time would have fixed that easily enough.”
Twain's writings were riddled with inconsistencies and contrasts.
So many factors influenced how people saw Palestine: where they were coming from, what parts of the country they saw, what travelers’ accounts they had already read, what religious tradition they were part of.
As they say, beauty is often in the eye of the beholder.
Can we truly say it fulfilled a prophecy?
You had me excited John!!
I truly want harmony but I am not convinced ...yet.
But I have had a lot of eye opening in my life . I am SO honest that when I find out people are not honest back it is a shock to me and I have found that I question alot of what is presented to me.
I don't mean to make you feel bad.
I just hope you will start to explore and question what you are told to believe concerning prophecy through various media.
Right now, I believe alot of what is in the news can benefit us concerning the season of what I feel to be persecution coming or a possible judgement on America but the vote is still out with me on prophecy being fulfilled post 70 A.D. with the Catholic church. Even the Roman Emperors who were High Priests like Caesar Augustus wore purple and scarlet and where I think the Catholic Church acquired them as the Pontifex Maximus (Roman Priests) was the Pope essentially.
I did look at your link John. Thank you for providing it..
In the Words of the late R.C.Sproul , Presbyterian:
(1998)
"No matter what view of eschatology [the doctrine of the Last Days] we embrace, we must take seriously the redemptive-historical importance of Jerusalem's destruction in A.D. 70." (The Last Days According to Jesus, p. 26)
"The coming of Christ in A.D.70 was a coming in judgment on the Jewish nation, indicating the end of the Jewish age and the fulfillment of a day of the Lord. Jesus really did come in judgment at this time, fulfilling his prophecy in the Olivet Discourse." (The Last Days According to Jesus, p. 158)
"The most significant, redemptive, historical action that takes place outside the New Testament, is the judgment that falls on Jerusalem, and by which judgment the Christian Church now emerges as The Body of Christ." (R.C. Sproul, Dust to Glory video series, 1997)
"Russell's book has forced me to take the events surrounding the destruction of jerusalem far more seriously than before, to open my eyes to the radical significance of this event in redemptive history. It vindicates the apostolic hope and prediction of our Lord's close-at-hand coming in judgment. My view on these matters remains in transition, as I have spelled out in The Last Days According to Jesus. But for me one thing is certain: I can never read the New Testament again the same way I read it before reading The Parousia. I hope better scholars than I will continue to analyze and evaluate the content of J. Stuart Russell's important work." ("Forword," in The Parousia (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999)
Here is a preview with the link provided at the end.
We can see from the teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus several things about the resurrection beliefs of the early Christians (2 Timothy 2:17-18). They must have believed that the resurrection would be spiritual in nature, and, therefore, not subject to confirmation by any physical evidence. If the early Christians had believed that the resurrection would involve the physical bodies coming out of the graves, as is taught today, Hymenaius and Philitus could never have convinced anyone that the resurrection had already happened.
They also must have believed that life on earth would go on with no material change after the resurrection. They didn't believe that they would be on a renovated planet earth as a consequence of the resurrection. Otherwise, the teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus would have been impossible. No one would have paid any attention to them.
The reason that their teaching that the resurrection has already happened was overthrowing the faith of some was that it postulated a consummation of the spiritual kingdom, while the earthly temple in Jerusalem still stood. This was a mixture of law and grace. This destroyed the faith of some by making the works of the law a part of the New Covenant.
Yes! Absolutely, without a doubt. Since Christ's resurrection was physical, won't ours be? No! Christ's actual resurrection was His going to Hades and coming back out. When he was resurrected from Hades, He was raised into his original body, which was transformed into His heavenly form. This was done as a SIGN to the apostles that he had done what He had promised. The resurrection of Jesus' body verified for His disciples, the resurrection of His soul that David had prophesied (Psalms 16:10). Peter preached that David looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:31). These verses speak of both spiritual death (the soul in Hades) and physical death (decay of the flesh). Jesus was resurrected from both.
The reason there are differences in the way we are raised and the way in which Christ was raised is because of those Biblically defined differences between Christ's body and ours. Differences such as:
Christ is the only one who is both fully God and fully Man -- God incarnate (John 1:1-18).
Christ is the only one who was virgin born (Matthew 1:23, Luke 1:27).
Christ is the only one who ever lived a sinless life (Hebrews 4:15).
Christ is the only one promised that his flesh would not suffer decay (Acts 2:27,31).
Jesus never committed sin and never became corrupted (Hebrews 4:15, 1 Peter 2:22-24).
Because of this, He could keep His selfsame body, whereas, we cannot.
Unless Jesus' body had been resurrected, His disciples would have had no assurance that His soul had been to Hades and had been resurrected. The physical resurrection of Christ was essential to verify the spiritual, to which it was tied. While the physical resurrection of our bodies would have no point, since we will not continue living on this planet, breathing earth's oxygen, and eating earth's food after we die physically.
'''''''''''''''Twain's writings were riddled with inconsistencies and contrasts.''''''''''''
Yet his words echo the prophecy give in Duet. 29:23. I see no way to say this doesn't fulfill that prophecy. I understand that some wish to remove parts of the word, or over look any
part that doesn't fit their ideas, though I find that sad.
"""""""""I don't mean to make you feel bad.""""""""
You are a long way from this. You see I learned many years ago that what man kind thinks doesn't matter.
""""""""I just hope you will start to explore and question what you are told to believe concerning prophecy through various media.""""""""
As I thought I made clear, I had been raised with much the same understanding as you hold. Questioning that teaching is what lead me to what I now hold. Without going down a road that is an endless he said she said thing, Flows will be shown in much of you understand. All you need to do is open your mind. It is never an easy thing to find that one has a flowed understand, and can be a struggle for everyone.
"""""""""""No matter what view of eschatology [the doctrine of the Last Days] we embrace, we must take seriously the redemptive-historical importance of Jerusalem's destruction in A.D. 70." (The Last Days According to Jesus, p. 26)"""""""""
Agreed, however we must not simply look at what someone said, we must look at how it fits into prophecy, and understand it from there.
"""""""The coming of Christ in A.D.70 was a coming in judgment on the Jewish nation, indicating the end of the Jewish age and the fulfillment of a day of the Lord. Jesus really did come in judgment at this time, fulfilling his prophecy in the Olivet Discourse." (The Last Days According to Jesus, p. 158) """"""
Replacement theology is a lie. Though they use this same quote in there teachings.
That however over looks this from Paul. Rom 11:1 I ask, then, has God rejected his own people, the nation of Israel? Of course not! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham and a member of the tribe of Benjamin.
"""""""Russell's book has forced me to take the events surrounding the destruction of jerusalem far more seriously than before, to open my eyes to the radical significance of this event in redemptive history."""""
So much so that you dismiss sound Biblical teachings? If so I find that sad. You see every word from man must be tested with an open mind and heart. In otherwards, we must seek the truth, and let The Spirit of HaShem be our teacher, not man. Yes I include my self in that as well.
""""""". I hope better scholars than I will continue to analyze and evaluate the content of J. Stuart Russell's important work." ("Forword," in The Parousia (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999)"""""""
Parts of this work have been class study for years. Even in some, Not many though, classes in Israel, so your hope is being seen.
"""""""""
Can we debate from both sides of a topic?
Posted : 1 Jan, 2020 01:19 AM
My turn with an article?
Here is a preview with the link provided at the end.
We can see from the teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus several things about the resurrection beliefs of the early Christians (2 Timothy 2:17-18). They must have believed that the resurrection would be spiritual in nature, and, therefore, not subject to confirmation by any physical evidence. If the early Christians had believed that the resurrection would involve the physical bodies coming out of the graves, as is taught today, Hymenaius and Philitus could never have convinced anyone that the resurrection had already happened.
They also must have believed that life on earth would go on with no material change after the resurrection. They didn't believe that they would be on a renovated planet earth as a consequence of the resurrection. Otherwise, the teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus would have been impossible. No one would have paid any attention to them.
The reason that their teaching that the resurrection has already happened was overthrowing the faith of some was that it postulated a consummation of the spiritual kingdom, while the earthly temple in Jerusalem still stood. This was a mixture of law and grace. This destroyed the faith of some by making the works of the law a part of the New Covenant."""""""
Yet it is works that show our faith. I think you will find that almost every one that follows the law does so BECAUSE they are save, not TO BE saved. After all there is a ton of scripture that backs keeping the Torah, and almost none, ( once seen in their true context. Then we are going in circles once more.
So we must move on with the topic at hand, Sukkot.
