quote:

ORIGINAL: Obadyah

quote:

ORIGINAL: Corinth7

quote:

telos <5056>
telov telos
Pronunciation: tel'-os
Origin: from a primary tello (to set out for a definite point or goal)
Reference: TDNT - 8:49,1161
PrtSpch: n n
In Greek: telh 2, telouv 6, telov 33
In NET: end 24, completely 2, revenue 2, culmination 1, aim 1, Finally 1, ends 1, being fulfilled 1, fate 1, result 1, tolls 1, purpose 1, outcome 1, goal 1, will be the fate 1
In AV: end 35, custom 3, uttermost 1, finally 1, ending 1, by (one's) continual + 1519 1
Count: 42
Definition: 1) end
1a) termination, the limit at which a thing ceases to be
(always of the end of some act or state, but not of the end
of a period of time)
1b) the end
1b1) the last in any succession or series
1b2) eternal
1c) that by which a thing is finished, its close, issue
1d) the end to which all things relate, the aim, purpose
2) toll, custom (i.e. indirect tax on goods)

__________________________________________________________________________________
The word for "end" in this passage is "teleo." It is where we get terms like telephone, telegraph, etc.

I think it would be better understood to say that Yeshua is the "goal" or "destination" of the Torah, and not the termination of (which would violate that Master's own words).



He is the End of the law for everyone that believes....I like "end"

Although I was never under the Law in the same manner as those of OLD.......

I understand that the law was to lead us to Christ: Seeing that if one could keep the law they would be Righteous- But we soon find out that the works of the law no one could keep to make them righteous, But announces their sins. So when those of OLD had Faith in Jesus to save them from the penalty of their sins, then Christ was the End of the law for righteousness. Meaning righteousness could not be found in works under the law.

So when they stopped doing works of the law to try to make them righteous before God.....and had faith in his son............then that was the end of the law for righteousness for those who put their faith in Christ for righteousness


For example of one who works underneath principal (physical) Thomas at their school- and now
he dies and comes back as principal (spirit) Thomas....................Principle (spirit) Thomas is the end of Principle (Physical) Thomas.

no longer follow the physical principal, but the spiritual principal

Umm, did you post this to prove him wrong?

This is actually supporting what he said. If this word were applied to a race it doesn't imply that you run no more. It only implies that your end, your completion, your fulfillment is the tello; Christ.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

I really like this passage of scripture and will continue to talk about it as I can. I've been working full time for the first time in over three years and can't post as freely as I used to. But let's start here. Moses covered with the veil is symbolic of the veiled glory of God. While the gospel of Jesus is the unveiled (bold) glory of God. The point is not so much the veil as it is what is being veiled.

The glory of God is obscured in Moses (the law) while the glory of God is unhindered and completely visible in the face of Jesus. Hearts remain in the darkened light and veiled from the glory of God under the law until the knowledge and revelation of Christ by the Holy Spirit removes the veil and makes the glory of God in Christ visible. ONLY in Christ by the Holy Spirit is the glory of God unveiled in all its boldness...the boldness and glory we now express to the world around us.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Corinth7

quote:

ORIGINAL: Obadyah

quote:

ORIGINAL: Corinth7

quote:

telos <5056>
telov telos
Pronunciation: tel'-os
Origin: from a primary tello (to set out for a definite point or goal)
Reference: TDNT - 8:49,1161
PrtSpch: n n
In Greek: telh 2, telouv 6, telov 33
In NET: end 24, completely 2, revenue 2, culmination 1, aim 1, Finally 1, ends 1, being fulfilled 1, fate 1, result 1, tolls 1, purpose 1, outcome 1, goal 1, will be the fate 1
In AV: end 35, custom 3, uttermost 1, finally 1, ending 1, by (one's) continual + 1519 1
Count: 42
Definition: 1) end
1a) termination, the limit at which a thing ceases to be
(always of the end of some act or state, but not of the end
of a period of time)
1b) the end
1b1) the last in any succession or series
1b2) eternal
1c) that by which a thing is finished, its close, issue
1d) the end to which all things relate, the aim, purpose
2) toll, custom (i.e. indirect tax on goods)

__________________________________________________________________________________
The word for "end" in this passage is "teleo." It is where we get terms like telephone, telegraph, etc.

I think it would be better understood to say that Yeshua is the "goal" or "destination" of the Torah, and not the termination of (which would violate that Master's own words).



He is the End of the law for everyone that believes....I like "end"

Although I was never under the Law in the same manner as those of OLD.......

I understand that the law was to lead us to Christ: Seeing that if one could keep the law they would be Righteous- But we soon find out that the works of the law no one could keep to make them righteous, But announces their sins. So when those of OLD had Faith in Jesus to save them from the penalty of their sins, then Christ was the End of the law for righteousness. Meaning righteousness could not be found in works under the law.

So when they stopped doing works of the law to try to make them righteous before God.....and had faith in his son............then that was the end of the law for righteousness for those who put their faith in Christ for righteousness


For example of one who works underneath principal (physical) Thomas at their school- and now
he dies and comes back as principal (spirit) Thomas....................Principle (spirit) Thomas is the end of Principle (Physical) Thomas.

no longer follow the physical principal, but the spiritual principal

Umm, did you post this to prove him wrong?

This is actually supporting what he said. If this word were applied to a race it doesn't imply that you run no more. It only implies that your end, your completion, your fulfillment is the tello; Christ.

Hey You! How are you?

lol not everything has to be an argument, The terms are closely related. If he wants to use the term goal.....I don't see that it makes much of a difference- yet the word "end" is found under the definition, where as I don't see the term goal spelled out.

Have a good day!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

I really like this passage of scripture and will continue to talk about it as I can. I've been working full time for the first time in over three years and can't post as freely as I used to. But let's start here. Moses covered with the veil is symbolic of the veiled glory of God. While the gospel of Jesus is the unveiled (bold) glory of God. The point is not so much the veil as it is what is being veiled.

The glory of God is obscured in Moses (the law) while the glory of God is unhindered and completely visible in the face of Jesus. Hearts remain in the darkened light and veiled from the glory of God under the law until the knowledge and revelation of Christ by the Holy Spirit removes the veil and makes the glory of God in Christ visible. ONLY in Christ by the Holy Spirit is the glory of God unveiled in all its boldness...the boldness and glory we now express to the world around us.

That is not what the passage says. The point is the Spirit is greater than the letter. This does not remove the letter, but removes dullness of mind that depends only on the letter. When those without Adonai's Spirit read the Tanach, they do not understand. However, those who read it with Adonai's Spirit have it written on their hearts, because it is not just wriiten word. Even the "gospels" are veiled to those who have not Adonai's Spirit. As you say, only in HaMeshiach by Adonai's Spirit is The Gospel unveiled. When we proclaim Adonai's Word we do so with boldness not with our faces veiled, because the afterglow from being exposed to Adonai does not threaten those who are followers of HaMeshiach.

By the way, I hope your new employmwnt works out for you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

He's comparing the boldness of his ministry to the corresponding boldness of the message of the New Covenant that his ministry proclaims. Just as the veiled ministry of Moses ministry corresponds to the subdued and limited glory of the first covenant that Moses' ministry proclaimed (the ministry of death-whoopie!).

quote:

I think the biggest error law keepers make is in thinking that Paul is talking about the same glory, the glory of law in the first covenant and that same glory now unveiled and revealed through the Spirit in the New Covenant. He's speaking of the lesser (and fading) glory of the law (the first covenant way of bulls and goats and Feasts and Sabbaths to God) versus the infinitely greater and never ending glory of Jesus (the New Covenant way of faith in Jesus' blood to God). And it is upon that fundamental difference in glories (not the same glory, but a different, yet similar glory now unveiled) that Paul illustrates the boldness and confidence of his ministry and the administration of the New Covenant message.

quote:

The old covenant was one glory, a subdued and fading glory, yet it contained a darkened, shadowy image of the different glory to come. The reason I feel the analogy of the back lit sheet is more appropriate to understanding the nature of the shadows of the law is that it represents something that is light (subdued as it was) yet is dark at the same time. Get it? It's the analogy that demonstrates something that is dark and light at the same time. A shadow cast on the ground does not do that as well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

That said, these are postulations on our parts and carry little weight other than theatrical persuasion. I believe it is best if we look to what is actually said, in the context in which it is written. Even though that provides limited information, it is less likely to lead to the varied and speculative interpretations that begin with personal doctrine and prospective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
I think the biggest error law keepers make is in thinking that Paul is talking about the same glory, the glory of law in the first covenant and that same glory now unveiled and revealed through the Spirit in the New Covenant. He's speaking of the lesser (and fading) glory of the law (the first covenant way of bulls and goats and Feasts and Sabbaths to God) versus the infinitely greater and never ending glory of Jesus (the New Covenant way of faith in Jesus' blood to God). And it is upon that fundamental difference in glories (not the same glory, but a different, yet similar glory now unveiled) that Paul illustrates the boldness and confidence of his ministry and the administration of the New Covenant message.

Well, to me, the biggest error I see made by those who believe Torah should not be kept is that the Scriptures are talking about the same Torah, the written Torah of the code written on stone and Adonai's perfect will for His people written on their hearts.

quote:


He speaks throughout the Tanach and the Apistolic Writings of those who follow the letter of the law and ignore Ruach HaChedosh(The Spirit). It is on that fundamental difference in "laws" that Paul uses the written code to illustrate our relationship to Him that has existed from the beginning and is renewed as He writes His ways on our hearts.

quote:

quote:

The old covenant was one glory, a subdued and fading glory, yet it contained a darkened, shadowy image of the different glory to come. The reason I feel the analogy of the back lit sheet is more appropriate to understanding the nature of the shadows of the law is that it represents something that is light (subdued as it was) yet is dark at the same time. Get it? It's the analogy that demonstrates something that is dark and light at the same time. A shadow cast on the ground does not do that as well.

The written code is a darkened glass through which we get an indication of the eternal glory of Adonai and how we should then live. The reason I think the direct shadow is a better analogy is that it is most likely the imagary that would have been familiar to Paul and those to whom he was writing. It is similar to the analogy of the man in the cave. I think it was postulated by C.S. Lewis. The man in the cave does not know of the world beyond his immediate surroundings. However, he postulates what the world outside is likely based on the shadows that appear on the walls of the cave. Each man postulates a somewhat different image of the world outside, based on his prospective. However, that does not change the actual nature of that which exists outside the cave. One can even change ones prospective and believe that what exists outside the cave has changed, when all that has changed is one's prospective.

That said, these are postulations on our parts and carry little weight other than theatrical persuasion. I believe it is best if we look to what is actually said, in the context in which it is written. Even though that provides limited information, it is less likely to lead to the varied and speculative interpretations that begin with personal doctrine and prospective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

Well, to me, the biggest error I see made by those who believe Torah should not be kept is that the Scriptures are talking about the same Torah, the written Torah of the code written on stone and Adonai's perfect will for His people written on their hearts.

If you mean some of the written first covenant law is now being written on the heart with some new and stricter stipulations added, then I agree. But I suspect that's not how you would summarize it.

quote:

quote:


He speaks throughout the Tanach and the Apistolic Writings of those who follow the letter of the law and ignore Ruach HaChedosh(The Spirit). It is on that fundamental difference in "laws" that Paul uses the written code to illustrate our relationship to Him that has existed from the beginning and is renewed as He writes His ways on our hearts.

There's no way you can say the old covenant has been renewed when you consider how much of the first covenant worship requirements got replaced (not renewed) by faith in Jesus.

quote:

My argument is the literal Sabbath observance belongs with what has been trumped by the New and better Way of faith in Jesus' blood...that's why the Sabbath is not required anymore as it was in the first covenant to be in covenant with God. What remains of the law and which gets written on the heart by the Spirit of God is "love your neighbor as yourself", the fulfillment of the law.

quote:

quote:


That said, these are postulations on our parts and carry little weight other than theatrical persuasion. I believe it is best if we look to what is actually said, in the context in which it is written. Even though that provides limited information, it is less likely to lead to the varied and speculative interpretations that begin with personal doctrine and prospective.

I agree with the part I emboldened in your post. The text plainly says the glory of God seen in the face of Moses at the giving of the first covenant was veiled and fading giving way to the glory of God now seen in the face of Jesus with the giving of the New Covenant--a different and far surpassing glory now revealed to man.

quote:

You're catching the symbolism aren't you? A symbolism (Moses vs. Jesus) used in a couple places in scripture (Heb. 3 for instance), and used to show the difference and superiority of the glory of Jesus' ministry of grace over and above the glory of Moses' ministry of law.

quote:

"...I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. 39Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses." (Acts 13:39)

Two different covenants, two different glories. The literal Sabbath requirement to be justified is a glory of the old covenant, not the New.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

Well, to me, the biggest error I see made by those who believe Torah should not be kept is that the Scriptures are talking about the same Torah, the written Torah of the code written on stone and Adonai's perfect will for His people written on their hearts.

If you mean some of the written first covenant law is now being written on the heart with some new and stricter stipulations added, then I agree. But I suspect that's not how you would summarize it.

No, I am saying that all of HaTorah is being written on our hearts...

quote:


...and the written code is a "cliff notes" version that we refer to while that is taking place.

quote:

quote:

quote:


He speaks throughout the Tanach and the Apistolic Writings of those who follow the letter of the law and ignore Ruach HaChedosh(The Spirit). It is on that fundamental difference in "laws" that Paul uses the written code to illustrate our relationship to Him that has existed from the beginning and is renewed as He writes His ways on our hearts.

There's no way you can say the old covenant has been renewed when you consider how much of the first covenant worship requirements got replaced (not renewed) by faith in Jesus.

That is your view. I see nothing that has been replaced. I see the written code clarified to be more in line with HaTorah.

quote:

quote:

My argument is the literal Sabbath observance belongs with what has been trumped by the New and better Way of faith in Jesus' blood...that's why the Sabbath is not required anymore as it was in the first covenant to be in covenant with God. What remains of the law and which gets written on the heart by the Spirit of God is "love your neighbor as yourself", the fulfillment of the law.

I am aware that is your argument. The problem I have with that argument is that it leaves out "you shall love Adonai Eloheim with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind."

quote:

quote:

quote:


That said, these are postulations on our parts and carry little weight other than theatrical persuasion. I believe it is best if we look to what is actually said, in the context in which it is written. Even though that provides limited information, it is less likely to lead to the varied and speculative interpretations that begin with personal doctrine and prospective.

I agree with the part I emboldened in your post. The text plainly says the glory of God seen in the face of Moses at the giving of the first covenant was veiled and fading giving way to the glory of God now seen in the face of Jesus with the giving of the New Covenant--a different and far surpassing glory now revealed to man.

That is not true. That is your interpretation. The text plainly says, "Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away."

The point is that Israel could not look on the radiance.

quote:


The fact that it faded away over time is secondary to the point. This portion is not speaking of the written code, but the direct revelation to Moshe'. That is HaTorah. The written code is the summary of that revelation that Adonai directed Moshe to write down.

quote:

quote:

You're catching the symbolism aren't you? A symbolism (Moses vs. Jesus) used in a couple places in scripture (Heb. 3 for instance), and used to show the difference and superiority of the glory of Jesus' ministry of grace over and above the glory of Moses' ministry of law.

Yes, I am catching the symbolism. Paul makes that clear in what the text plainly says. "But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the LORD, the veil is taken away."

Paul is comparing Adonai's revelation to Moshe' to the revelation we receive today from Yeshua HaMeshiach.

quote:


If we want to focus on the fading part, the revelation of Yeshua HaMeshiach also fades over time if we do not (Rom. 12:2) "keep letting (ourselves) be transformed by the renewing of (our) minds; so that (we) will know what God wants and will agree that what he wants is good, satisfying and able to succeed." However, that is not Paul's point in this passage. The point is that when our minds are renewed, we share that boldly, since we have the "rest of the story". Even then some still do not get it because the veil (dullness of mind) hinders them from seeing it.

quote:


It is only through Yeshua HaMeshiach renewing our minds that we get a clear understanding of what He meant to communicate in the written code.

quote:

quote:

"...I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. 39Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses." (Acts 13:39)

Two different covenants, two different glories. The literal Sabbath requirement to be justified is a glory of the old covenant, not the New.

Two different passages, two different contexts. This latter passage says the same thing I was pointing out, but in a different way. It is through Adonai Yeshua renewing our minds that we can recieve justification in all things. The written code does not cover "all things", but is meant to give us a taste of what Adonai requires. The keeping of Shabbat as merely an obligation of the written code is not glorious at all. The prophets tell us that. The keeping of Shabbat as Adonai intended gives glory to Adonai. That is not it's soul purpose, but, whenever one does as Adonai directs, it brings glory to Adonai.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

If you mean some of the written first covenant law is now being written on the heart with some new and stricter stipulations added, then I agree. But I suspect that's not how you would summarize it.

No, I am saying that all of HaTorah is being written on our hearts...

Spiritually speaking...Jesus being the fulfillment of the law...I agree.

quote:

quote:


...and the written code is a "cliff notes" version that we refer to while that is taking place.

Spiritual cliff notes is all I'll give you on this one.

quote:

quote:



That is your view. I see nothing that has been replaced. I see the written code clarified to be more in line with HaTorah.

Is Jesus a renewal, or a new veil altogether, required by law to be erected between the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies??

quote:

quote:


I am aware that is your argument. The problem I have with that argument is that it leaves out "you shall love Adonai Eloheim with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind."

Loving your neighbor as your yourself IS loving God. That's why it is 'like' the first command to love God.

quote:

The point is that Israel could not look on the radiance.

The law would not allow them to see it. Like the law not allowing someone to eat the blood of the sacrifice. The law, in and of itself, made no provision for these things. It's symbolic. Get it?

quote:

quote:


The fact that it faded away over time is secondary to the point. This portion is not speaking of the written code, but the direct revelation to Moshe'. That is HaTorah. The written code is the summary of that revelation that Adonai directed Moshe to write down.

Moses did not know the details of Jesus that he could purposely keep them from the Jews. He was in the dark about Him, too.

quote:

quote:


Paul is comparing Adonai's revelation to Moshe' to the revelation we receive today from Yeshua HaMeshiach.

Contrasting is the appropriate word, not comparing. That is plainly obvious in the passage. What similarity is Paul showing us? He's making a list of differences, one being greater than the other.

quote:

quote:


If we want to focus on the fading part, the revelation of Yeshua HaMeshiach also fades over time if we do not (Rom. 12:2) "keep letting (ourselves) be transformed by the renewing of (our) minds; so that (we) will know what God wants and will agree that what he wants is good, satisfying and able to succeed." However, that is not Paul's point in this passage. The point is that when our minds are renewed, we share that boldly, since we have the "rest of the story". Even then some still do not get it because the veil (dullness of mind) hinders them from seeing it.

And an unhealthy emphasis on law is one of the things that will do that.

quote:

quote:


It is only through Yeshua HaMeshiach renewing our minds that we get a clear understanding of what He meant to communicate in the written code.

I think I finally figured out what's wrong with your understanding of the passage. The revelation being talked about is the revelation of Jesus in salvation, not holy rules for living! The thing that is hindered is the knowledge and revelation of Jesus, not 'do this' and 'don't do this'.

quote:

quote:


Two different passages, two different contexts. This latter passage says the same thing I was pointing out, but in a different way. It is through Adonai Yeshua renewing our minds that we can recieve justification in all things. The written code does not cover "all things", but is meant to give us a taste of what Adonai requires. The keeping of Shabbat as merely an obligation of the written code is not glorious at all. The prophets tell us that. The keeping of Shabbat as Adonai intended gives glory to Adonai. That is not it's soul purpose, but, whenever one does as Adonai directs, it brings glory to Adonai.

As I say, the passage isn't about holy living. It's about the knowledge of the Christ and salvation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

If you mean some of the written first covenant law is now being written on the heart with some new and stricter stipulations added, then I agree. But I suspect that's not how you would summarize it.

No, I am saying that all of HaTorah is being written on our hearts...

Spiritually speaking...Jesus being the fulfillment of the law...I agree.

Whatever that means

quote:

quote:

quote:


...and the written code is a "cliff notes" version that we refer to while that is taking place.

Spiritual cliff notes is all I'll give you on this one.

Cliff notes are a list of the highlights, major characters and basic story line. I don't know what "spiritual cliff notes" would look like.

quote:

quote:



That is your view. I see nothing that has been replaced. I see the written code clarified to be more in line with HaTorah.

Is Jesus a renewal, or a new veil altogether, required by law to be erected between the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies??

quote:


The veil over Moshe's face is symbolic of the fear and mental dullness that keeps people from believing our report, as Isaiah says.

quote:

quote:

quote:


I am aware that is your argument. The problem I have with that argument is that it leaves out "you shall love Adonai Eloheim with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind."

Loving your neighbor as your yourself IS loving God. That's why it is 'like' the first command to love God.

No it is not. "Is", in english, is a reflexive verb, both sides are equal. Sometimes they are not, but that does not appear to be how you are using it. Howvever, "like" indicates a metaphor or a similarity, the two sides are never exactly the same. Loving one's neighbor is a metaphor for loving Adonai. When Yeshua says, (Mt 25:40) "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'" He is pointing out the importance of caring for our brothers, but He is not saying that one need not honor Him in other ways.

quote:

quote:

The point is that Israel could not look on the radiance.

The law would not allow them to see it. Like the law not allowing someone to eat the blood of the sacrifice. The law, in and of itself, made no provision for these things. It's symbolic. Get it?

Chapter and verse please. I know of no commandment regarding the veil over Moshe's face. He put it on at their request.

quote:

quote:

quote:


The fact that it faded away over time is secondary to the point. This portion is not speaking of the written code, but the direct revelation to Moshe'. That is HaTorah. The written code is the summary of that revelation that Adonai directed Moshe to write down.

Moses did not know the details of Jesus that he could purposely keep them from the Jews. He was in the dark about Him, too.

That does not change the context. Paul is talking to us about how we bear witness to what has been revealed. We are not to veil our witness as Moshe' did. The veil, in this context, is not HaTorah, but that which keeps us from seeing HaTorah in it's fullness, ie dullness of mind.

quote:

quote:

quote:


If we want to focus on the fading part, the revelation of Yeshua HaMeshiach also fades over time if we do not (Rom. 12:2) "keep letting (ourselves) be transformed by the renewing of (our) minds; so that (we) will know what God wants and will agree that what he wants is good, satisfying and able to succeed." However, that is not Paul's point in this passage. The point is that when our minds are renewed, we share that boldly, since we have the "rest of the story". Even then some still do not get it because the veil (dullness of mind) hinders them from seeing it.

And an unhealthy emphasis on law is one of the things that will do that.

An unhealthy emphasis on the writings of Paul can also do this. I am in no way dissing Paul, it is just without the context of the Tanach Paul's writings can be a bit confusing.

quote:

quote:

quote:


It is only through Yeshua HaMeshiach renewing our minds that we get a clear understanding of what He meant to communicate in the written code.

I think I finally figured out what's wrong with your understanding of the passage. The revelation being talked about is the revelation of Jesus in salvation, not holy rules for living! The thing that is hindered is the knowledge and revelation of Jesus, not 'do this' and 'don't do this'.

2 Cor. 3:12-16 is talking about our witness. What we bare witness to is The Promise of salvation, but our witness is not salvation, it is proper living. We are getting a bit far afield in this attempt to equate th veil with HaTorah. The 1 Cor. 13 analogy of a darkened glass does work in this regard, but that passage is clearly talking about proper living. So, if keeping Shabbat is part of our witness, we should practice it boldly.

quote:

quote:

quote:


Two different passages, two different contexts. This latter passage says the same thing I was pointing out, but in a different way. It is through Adonai Yeshua renewing our minds that we can recieve justification in all things. The written code does not cover "all things", but is meant to give us a taste of what Adonai requires. The keeping of Shabbat as merely an obligation of the written code is not glorious at all. The prophets tell us that. The keeping of Shabbat as Adonai intended gives glory to Adonai. That is not it's soul purpose, but, whenever one does as Adonai directs, it brings glory to Adonai.

As I say, the passage isn't about holy living. It's about the knowledge of the Christ and salvation.

So, the analogy that you brought up of the veil being lifted, for which I found the passage, is not relevant to the point of this thread, since we both agree Shabbat is not a requirement for salvation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

If you mean some of the written first covenant law is now being written on the heart with some new and stricter stipulations added, then I agree. But I suspect that's not how you would summarize it.

No, I am saying that all of HaTorah is being written on our hearts...

Spiritually speaking...Jesus being the fulfillment of the law...I agree.

Whatever that means

Since Christ is the reality that the symbols of the law only represented (he is the real lamb, etc.) everyone who believes in Christ has fulfilled the requirements of the worship laws with the real thing, not the representation. For example, it would be absurd to think that a literal lamb is somehow the fulfillment of the law of Passover instead of Christ himself being the actual fulfillment of the Passover requirement. It is in that sense (spiritually) that the entire law is written on the heart of the believer.

quote:

quote:

quote:


...and the written code is a "cliff notes" version that we refer to while that is taking place.

Spiritual cliff notes is all I'll give you on this one.

Cliff notes are a list of the highlights, major characters and basic story line. I don't know what "spiritual cliff notes" would look like.

The OT is like a brief summary of the spiritual aspects of the ministry of Christ. Of course the actual book that those notes are about is the NT.

quote:

quote:



That is your view. I see nothing that has been replaced. I see the written code clarified to be more in line with HaTorah.

Is Jesus a renewal, or a new veil altogether, required by law to be erected between the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies??

Now you are mixing metphores.

quote:


The veil over Moshe's face is symbolic of the fear and mental dullness that keeps people from believing our report, as Isaiah says.

quote:

quote:

quote:


I am aware that is your argument. The problem I have with that argument is that it leaves out "you shall love Adonai Eloheim with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind."

Loving your neighbor as your yourself IS loving God. That's why it is 'like' the first command to love God.

No it is not. "Is", in english, is a reflexive verb, both sides are equal. Sometimes they are not, but that does not appear to be how you are using it. Howvever, "like" indicates a metaphor or a similarity, the two sides are never exactly the same. Loving one's neighbor is a metaphor for loving Adonai. When Yeshua says, (Mt 25:40) "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'" He is pointing out the importance of caring for our brothers, but He is not saying that one need not honor Him in other ways.

quote:

quote:

The point is that Israel could not look on the radiance.

The law would not allow them to see it. Like the law not allowing someone to eat the blood of the sacrifice. The law, in and of itself, made no provision for these things. It's symbolic. Get it?

Chapter and verse please. I know of no commandment regarding the veil over Moshe's face. He put it on at their request.

quote:

quote:

quote:


The fact that it faded away over time is secondary to the point. This portion is not speaking of the written code, but the direct revelation to Moshe'. That is HaTorah. The written code is the summary of that revelation that Adonai directed Moshe to write down.

Moses did not know the details of Jesus that he could purposely keep them from the Jews. He was in the dark about Him, too.

That does not change the context. Paul is talking to us about how we bear witness to what has been revealed. We are not to veil our witness as Moshe' did. The veil, in this context, is not HaTorah, but that which keeps us from seeing HaTorah in it's fullness, ie dullness of mind.

quote:

quote:

quote:


If we want to focus on the fading part, the revelation of Yeshua HaMeshiach also fades over time if we do not (Rom. 12:2) "keep letting (ourselves) be transformed by the renewing of (our) minds; so that (we) will know what God wants and will agree that what he wants is good, satisfying and able to succeed." However, that is not Paul's point in this passage. The point is that when our minds are renewed, we share that boldly, since we have the "rest of the story". Even then some still do not get it because the veil (dullness of mind) hinders them from seeing it.

And an unhealthy emphasis on law is one of the things that will do that.

An unhealthy emphasis on the writings of Paul can also do this. I am in no way dissing Paul, it is just without the context of the Tanach Paul's writings can be a bit confusing.

quote:

quote:

quote:


It is only through Yeshua HaMeshiach renewing our minds that we get a clear understanding of what He meant to communicate in the written code.

I think I finally figured out what's wrong with your understanding of the passage. The revelation being talked about is the revelation of Jesus in salvation, not holy rules for living! The thing that is hindered is the knowledge and revelation of Jesus, not 'do this' and 'don't do this'.

2 Cor. 3:12-16 is talking about our witness. What we bare witness to is The Promise of salvation, but our witness is not salvation, it is proper living. We are getting a bit far afield in this attempt to equate th veil with HaTorah. The 1 Cor. 13 analogy of a darkened glass does work in this regard, but that passage is clearly talking about proper living. So, if keeping Shabbat is part of our witness, we should practice it boldly.

quote:

quote:

quote:


Two different passages, two different contexts. This latter passage says the same thing I was pointing out, but in a different way. It is through Adonai Yeshua renewing our minds that we can recieve justification in all things. The written code does not cover "all things", but is meant to give us a taste of what Adonai requires. The keeping of Shabbat as merely an obligation of the written code is not glorious at all. The prophets tell us that. The keeping of Shabbat as Adonai intended gives glory to Adonai. That is not it's soul purpose, but, whenever one does as Adonai directs, it brings glory to Adonai.

As I say, the passage isn't about holy living. It's about the knowledge of the Christ and salvation.

So, the analogy that you brought up of the veil being lifted, for which I found the passage, is not relevant to the point of this thread, since we both agree Shabbat is not a requirement for salvation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Obadyah
In reference to the Sabbath wouldn’t you agree that if God showed his honor for it before the law that it was part of his nature and not part of the law?

quote:


I look at the Sabbath in Genesis 2:3 no different than I look at his created process for man and woman in Genesis 1:27-28. These are things that can be changed but it doesn’t mean that we should. Could you please explain to me how the two differ from your prospective?

quote:

These are things that can be changed but it doesn’t mean that we should.

quote:


Since you have a tendency to go off to the wilderness when a direct question is asked. I want to repeat my question a 2nd time.

quote:


Please explain how God’s created process has changed in reference to Genesis 2:3
3And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
Is any different from changing Genesis 1:27-28
27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.



I’m asking for both of these passages to be addressed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

Trying to somehow equate the importance of Sabbath at creation with the creation of man and woman is unreasonable. What I will compare is the introduction of animal sacrifice for sin in the beginning before the law and the Sabbath.

You are the one who has to have some kind of an explanation of why animal sacrifice for sin is no longer held in high honor and esteem but the Sabbath must be, even though animal sacrifice for sin is also from the veryt beginning of earth history before the law. Something that should continue to be held in such high honor by virtue of it's introduction near creation before the law, according to your beliefs, has in fact become obsolete and useless with the appearing of Christ. My question to you...why for that, but not possible, or allowed for the Sabbath?

quote:

You are the one who has to have some kind of an explanation of why animal sacrifice for sin is no longer held in high honor and esteem but the Sabbath must be, even though animal sacrifice for sin is also from the veryt beginning of earth history before the law. Something that should continue to be held in such high honor by virtue of it's introduction near creation before the law, according to your beliefs, has in fact become obsolete and useless with the appearing of Christ.

quote:


Since you have a tendency to go off to the wilderness

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
Spiritually speaking...Jesus being the fulfillment of the law...I agree.

Whatever that means

Since Christ is the reality that the symbols of the law only represented (he is the real lamb, etc.) everyone who believes in Christ has fulfilled the requirements of the worship laws with the real thing, not the representation. For example, it would be absurd to think that a literal lamb is somehow the fulfillment of the law of Passover instead of Christ himself being the actual fulfillment of the Passover requirement. It is in that sense (spiritually) that the entire law is written on the heart of the believer.

quote:

quote:


Cliff notes are a list of the highlights, major characters and basic story line. I don't know what "spiritual cliff notes" would look like.

The OT is like a brief summary of the spiritual aspects of the ministry of Christ. Of course the actual book that those notes are about is the NT.

quote:

Don't get confused. I'm not making a connection at all between the veil on Moses' face and the veil in the Temple. If you stay in the context of what we were specifically talking about you'll see I'm using the veil in the Temple as a perfect example of something being replaced in favor of something else once required by law. I used that because it is so clearly spelled out in Hebrews it is beyond honest debate. No honest person can say nothing in the first covenant gets replaced with something new in the New Covenant. That is a ridiculous argument.

quote:

quote:


The veil over Moshe's face is symbolic of the fear and mental dullness that keeps people from believing our report, as Isaiah says.

The veiled glory of God in the law is WHY people have dullness of mind about the things of God from the law. It doesn't have a detailed enough revelation of God's glory within itself to bring about anything more than a dullness of mind to those who read it. As the text says, only in Christ is the veil removed and the glory of God in Christ revealed in all it's fullness. The law itself does not do that. It can't do that.

quote:

quote:


"Is", in english, is a reflexive verb, both sides are equal. Sometimes they are not, but that does not appear to be how you are using it. Howvever, "like" indicates a metaphor or a similarity, the two sides are never exactly the same. Loving one's neighbor is a metaphor for loving Adonai. When Yeshua says, (Mt 25:40) "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'" He is pointing out the importance of caring for our brothers, but He is not saying that one need not honor Him in other ways.

But the Bible is very clear. If that other way is separate from you also loving your neighbor, it is not love for God at all. There is no such thing as love for God apart from love for others.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to love God without loving your neighbor. If you are loving your neighbor YOU ARE LOVING GOD. How does that not make loving your neighbor equivalent to loving God? If not loving others, who are made in the image of God, is an affront to God, then loving them is most certainly loving God through that same image of God they bear.

quote:

quote:

quote:

The point is that Israel could not look on the radiance.

Chapter and verse please. I know of no commandment regarding the veil over Moshe's face. He put it on at their request.

You are the one who owes me chapter and verse. Where in the law of Moses is the complete unveiled, clear gospel message of Jesus Christ to be found?

quote:

What is it that you can move out of the way in the law itself that someone put there so one can see Christ clearly if they wanted to and were not afraid to look? It's symbolic, BT. No one put something over the law of Moses such that you can't see the glory of God in Christ clearly because of that. That full glory isn't there to begin with! That's the point. The Israelites didn't cover it. The law in and of itself has a veil over the glory of Christ.

quote:

There is no way possible to see the clear unveiled glory of Christ in the law alone. That extra revelation comes from outside of the law, not from the law itself. Do you understand? There is no way to see the full glory and revelation of Christ in the law, even if Moses didn't veil his face. It's symbolism. What do you think Moses glowing face would reveal to anyone even if they did look at it? It's symbolic of the fact that the truth of Jesus and the gospel is veiled in Moses and the law.

quote:

You'd understand it better if you'd stop trying to interpret Moses and the veil separately. They are to be understood together. It means the glory of God in Christ is veiled in the ministry of Moes and the law and only becomes visible through Christ Himself by the Spirit. As much as you want to resist it, you can't see the full glory of God in Christ in the ministry of Moses and the law. That's the point. Only in Christ himself is the veil removed and the glory of Christ is now visible through the symbols of the law.

quote:

quote:


An unhealthy emphasis on the writings of Paul can also do this. I am in no way dissing Paul, it is just without the context of the Tanach Paul's writings can be a bit confusing.

There is nothing confusing about it. Assuming he wrote Hebrews, he speaks very clearly about the end of the literal requirements of the first covenant, not the continuation of them.

quote:

quote:


2 Cor. 3:12-16 is talking about our witness. What we bare witness to is The Promise of salvation, but our witness is not salvation, it is proper living. We are getting a bit far afield in this attempt to equate th veil with HaTorah. The 1 Cor. 13 analogy of a darkened glass does work in this regard, but that passage is clearly talking about proper living. So, if keeping Shabbat is part of our witness, we should practice it boldly.

You have to read on into chapter 4 to see he is talking about the ministry of the gospel. He is NOT talking about holy living now being revealed with the lifting of the veil. The lifting of the veil is how we can see that the shadowy symbols of the law were veiled images of Christ and his ministry, which we now share with unveiled ministries of glory.

quote:

quote:


So, the analogy that you brought up of the veil being lifted, for which I found the passage, is not relevant to the point of this thread, since we both agree Shabbat is not a requirement for salvation.

The Sabbath was a requirement to not be condemned. That's the veiled message seen in the law. The unveiled message, now seen in Christ (not the law), is that belief in Christ is how we are not condemned. the fourth commandment was a symbol of our salvation rest in Christ and how we must keep that to not be condemned.

quote:

When the veil gets removed we don't see Moses and the law as the gospel glory of God. We see the glory of Christ--the types and symbols of the law now unveiled. Get it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Obadyah

It seems like you missed the question, or you’re starting to see the point of how the Sabbath cannot be replaced or changed because its in creation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

Okay, so it was a picture and type of Christ. No chance the Sabbath can be that too, huh? Not allowed, just not possible...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Obadyah
Question:

quote:

You are the one who has to have some kind of an explanation of why animal sacrifice for sin is no longer held in high honor and esteem but the Sabbath must be, even though animal sacrifice for sin is also from the veryt beginning of earth history before the law. Something that should continue to be held in such high honor by virtue of it's introduction near creation before the law, according to your beliefs, has in fact become obsolete and useless with the appearing of Christ.

I could just feel you struggling to write that without saying that the sacrifice was a part of creation.

Answer:
Sacrifice was before law and not apart of creation. These are two completely different things. One is something that was added as a process in response to sin, which would be sacrifice. This is why the first mention of anything being sacrifice to YHWH doesn’t come into play until after Adam and Eve sin in Genesis chapter 3. Let me explain to you how unjust your assumption is in reference to time. In chapter 3 they sin with no children even being mentioned. By chapter four, they have children, which have mastered a craft. So much so, that they knew how to offer it to Yahweh.
This plays against what you’re offering in two ways if you remain logical with your point.
1) We see that sin is a result and start of God requiring a sacrifice. Unlike the things that he place in motion from creation like day, night, time, animals, and their process for mating, males, females, and their mating process; and yes the Sabbath too. These are all things done before sin, things that cannot be changed. If you think one could then you may as well be gay and livelong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Obadyah
2) We also see that a lot of time past from one chapter to another. We find the first sacrifice being made by Cain and Abel in Gen 4:4? I hope you and however else thinks of this is getting the point. Adam and Eve didn’t even have children in the beginning or the final passage in chapter 3. Now suddenly, one chapter later they have 2 children, which means it took her at least two years to get them both out of her body. Lastly Genesis 4:3 takes away your assumption with even more time being past beyond the first 7 days of creation. Read
Gen 4:3
3And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.
Moving beyond your meaningless side questions. I think my question deserves an answer since it is what this topic is all about and not sacrifices.

quote:


I wasn’t asking you to explain the creation of man and woman I’m asking you to compare the Sabbath with the process that Yahweh has given man and woman to function e.g.

quote:


Gen 1:28
28And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Let’s not look at this as law for right now sense that’s not even what I pitch at you. Thus my plea…


I’m discussing how all things he created in the beginning are set that way until this earth spends in a circle no more. Somehow the Sabbath is the only thing that you see fit to change.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bluethread

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw
Spiritually speaking...Jesus being the fulfillment of the law...I agree.

Whatever that means

Since Christ is the reality that the symbols of the law only represented (he is the real lamb, etc.) everyone who believes in Christ has fulfilled the requirements of the worship laws with the real thing, not the representation. For example, it would be absurd to think that a literal lamb is somehow the fulfillment of the law of Passover instead of Christ himself being the actual fulfillment of the Passover requirement. It is in that sense (spiritually) that the entire law is written on the heart of the believer.

OK, first, we haven't "fullfilled the requirements of the worship laws", Yeshua has.

quote:


Yes, it is absurd to think that the sacrifice of a lamb is the fulfillment of Pesach, just as it is absurd to think that drinking of a cup and eating bread is the fulfillment of the same commandment. Yet, the drinking of the cup and eating the bread are seen as necessary.

quote:


Now, I don't see how substitutionary actions could be equivalent to the covenant written on our hearts. Yes, it was kept by Yeshua and He empowers us live in accordance with it, but the covenant being on the heart and mind of Yeshua hardly counts as it being written on our hearts.

quote:


The other is the veil of the Temple. This veil is not equated with the whole of the written code, nor is a shadow even eluded to.

quote:

quote:

quote:


The veil over Moshe's face is symbolic of the fear and mental dullness that keeps people from believing our report, as Isaiah says.

The veiled glory of God in the law is WHY people have dullness of mind about the things of God from the law. It doesn't have a detailed enough revelation of God's glory within itself to bring about anything more than a dullness of mind to those who read it. As the text says, only in Christ is the veil removed and the glory of God in Christ revealed in all it's fullness. The law itself does not do that. It can't do that.

No, dullness of mind is a characteristic of the listener.

quote:


Difficult text does not create dullness of mind, dullness of mind makes it hard to understand difficult text.

quote:


As Paul tells us, (2 Cor. 3:15-16) "But unto this day, whensoever Moses is read, a veil lieth upon their heart. But whensoever it shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Are you saying that one turns to Adonai, the Tanach is taken away? No, the dullness of mind is taken away, so that the the Tanach can be understood properly.

quote:


Many athiest love thier neighbors, but they do not love Adonai.

quote:

quote:

quote:

quote:

The point is that Israel could not look on the radiance.

Chapter and verse please. I know of no commandment regarding the veil over Moshe's face. He put it on at their request.

You are the one who owes me chapter and verse. Where in the law of Moses is the complete unveiled, clear gospel message of Jesus Christ to be found?

That was not your point. You said, "The point is that Israel could not look on the radiance." We were talking about the radiance or afterglow of interacting with Adonai. If you wish to drop your intyerpretation of the analogy in (2 Cor. 3) then fine, we can move on to other things. However, I am not going to let a declarative statement like that above go unsupported.

quote:

quote:

What is it that you can move out of the way in the law itself that someone put there so one can see Christ clearly if they wanted to and were not afraid to look? It's symbolic, BT. No one put something over the law of Moses such that you can't see the glory of God in Christ clearly because of that. That full glory isn't there to begin with! That's the point. The Israelites didn't cover it. The law in and of itself has a veil over the glory of Christ.

What was put there is rabbinics and personal interpretation apart from an understanding of The Promise to the extent revealed. We have already established that Avraham was saved without any written Scriptures, let alone the Apistolic Writings. This is made clear in Hebrews, it is Adonai that provided this understanding to Him. Adonai has provided this understanding to all who have turned to Him.

quote:

quote:

There is no way possible to see the clear unveiled glory of Christ in the law alone. That extra revelation comes from outside of the law, not from the law itself. Do you understand? There is no way to see the full glory and revelation of Christ in the law, even if Moses didn't veil his face. It's symbolism. What do you think Moses glowing face would reveal to anyone even if they did look at it? It's symbolic of the fact that the truth of Jesus and the gospel is veiled in Moses and the law.

The totality of Yeshua and His work is not even revealed in the Apistolic Writings. The glory of adonai Yeshua is not limited to the Written word. If Aedonai so chose He could reveal everything necessary for salvation to a man livinbg in isolation on a desert Isle.

quote:


Yes, much of the things in HaTorah are symbolic, but so are things in the Apistolic Writings , like baptism and "the Lord's Supper".

quote:

quote:

You'd understand it better if you'd stop trying to interpret Moses and the veil separately. They are to be understood together. It means the glory of God in Christ is veiled in the ministry of Moes and the law and only becomes visible through Christ Himself by the Spirit. As much as you want to resist it, you can't see the full glory of God in Christ in the ministry of Moses and the law. That's the point. Only in Christ himself is the veil removed and the glory of Christ is now visible through the symbols of the law.

I understand what you are trying to say. You just have yet to show how your intepretation is supported by the Scriptures. You have mixed metapores, misunderstood parts of speech and used logical falacy to equate Moshe' and the veil. The context of the two passages either sees the veil as "dullness of mind" of "His flesh". I do not see where it is equated with HaTorah anywhere.

quote:

quote:

quote:


So, the analogy that you brought up of the veil being lifted, for which I found the passage, is not relevant to the point of this thread, since we both agree Shabbat is not a requirement for salvation.

The Sabbath was a requirement to not be condemned. That's the veiled message seen in the law. The unveiled message, now seen in Christ (not the law), is that belief in Christ is how we are not condemned. the fourth commandment was a symbol of our salvation rest in Christ and how we must keep that to not be condemned.

So, Salvation was not by grace though faith, but by works?

quote:

quote:

When the veil gets removed we don't see Moses and the law as the gospel glory of God. We see the glory of Christ--the types and symbols of the law now unveiled. Get it?

When the veil is removed others seen the afterglow in us and know that we have been in the presence of Adonai.

quote:


I don't see how keeping Shabbat hinders that or not keeping Shabbat enhances that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ChainSaw

quote:

ORIGINAL: Obadyah

It seems like you missed the question, or you’re starting to see the point of how the Sabbath cannot be replaced or changed because its in creation.

(That is really sorry of you O to do what you're doing in the above. Actually...shame on you.)

This is easy, but still hardly something to just dash off in a sentence or two with the remaining minutes of my lunch break I had earlier, but maybe this will do it:

The point you're making is the 7th day was sanctified at creation. Regardless of what was attached to the day, your argument is the plain fact that it was sanctified, right? Well, if you can stop yourself from blocking out the honest facts of Hebrews of how the sanctified Day of Atonement, the day purposely and specifically set apart by God on his calendar for the cleansing of sin guilt, is now an obsolete, dusty relic of times past EVEN THOUGH THAT SPECIFIC DAY WAS CLEARLY SANCTIFIED AT A PARTICULAR POINT IN HUMAN HISTORY, then you can understand how the Sabbath day can be declared as sanctified by God but then that declaration have less or no meaning later.

Lay down your fear of considering your opponents arguments and let it soak in. A big step of Christian maturity is letting yourself honestly consider your opponents arguments. I learned this myself from debating an Atheist. Through that experience I learned to stop throwing out rehearsed, unsupported 'truths' just because I was sure they were true but couldn't actually give a reasonable or logical or supported explanation why they were true.

Now, does it sound like I excused myself from your question because I didn't have a good answer? Hardly.

Now, let's read the rest of your post...