Postrib vs Dispy

[RandyPNW]

Did you read the passages I posted?

Deuteronomy 30:8
Ezekiel 37:24
Ezekiel 36:27

Yes, laws and decrees remain after the element of atonement is satisfied. Once atonement and its requirements are removed from the Law, what we have is the original commandment to Man, to live in God's image.

Temple, priesthood, and sacrifice cease to be of any concern--they all had to do with reconciling Man to God. Atonement meets that need for all time in Christ.

We still have need to love God with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength. And we still need to respect and care for our neighbors. There is still God's Law after the Law of Moses is completed in the life and death of Christ.

[Fenris]

Deuteronomy 30:8
Ezekiel 37:24
Ezekiel 36:27

Yes, laws and decrees remain after the element of atonement is satisfied. Once atonement and its requirements are removed from the Law, what we have is the original commandment to Man, to live in God's image.

So the law is still in effect. Interesting. Because you've been saying the exact opposite.

[Fenris]

Yes, I've read where some Jews believe that some laws in the future Kingdom will no longer be needed,

Unless you can provide a source this is just hearsay. Because I don't know any Jews who believe that.

You really misunderstand me, though. I never meant to say that loving God and others was designed to show the need for atonement. No, I was referring to many of the laws under the Law of Moses

Referring to the bible as "the law of Moses" also sells it short. Because not one law in the bible was invented by Moses. They all come from God.

that demonstrated a need for cleansing rituals in order to present themselves before a holy God.

You're confusing two topics. There are laws of ritual impurity, say coming into contact with a human corpse, that have nothing whatsoever to do with sin.

I believe atonement is key to obtaining eternal purification so that there are no longer any obstacles between God and men.

There are no obstacles now. Psalm 145: The Lord is near to all who call upon Him

Tied in with atonement are, as I said, rituals of cleansing and purification, and rituals of sacrifice. Obviously, when one is purified through legal atonement, what need any more to distinguish, symbolically, between clean and unclean foods?

Let's look at Leviticus 11

You shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creeps; nor shall you make yourselves unclean with them, lest you be defiled by them. For I am the Lord your God. You shall therefore consecrate yourselves, and you shall be holy; for I am holy. Neither shall you defile yourselves with any creeping thing that creeps on the earth. For I am the Lord who brings you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God. You shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.

‘This is the law of the animals and the birds and every living creature that moves in the waters, and of every creature that creeps on the earth, to distinguish between the unclean and the clean, and between the animal that may be eaten and the animal that may not be eaten.’ ”

I mean, this seems pretty straightforward. God is saying to be holy and not eat these animals. That's it. Nothing about atonement or anything else that you're saying. Because the law isn't just about atonement. It's about uplifting man and making us holy. Any of us. All of us.

You're looking at the law in a completely different way. Saying it's negative.

I agree that *religious Jews* may be less libertine than liberal Jews, who are less religious. But Jews identify as a minority,

What do you call a group that numbers only 13 million out of a world population of almost 8 billion? That numbers 6 million out of a US population of 330 million? A minority. That doesn't mean I'm lining up for government handouts. It means I desire that my rights be respected.

whether as an ethnic group or as a religious group, and would likely want to see Christianity be tolerant. This would call for liberalizing Christians laws, right?

How Christians practice their faith is none of my business. Just like how Jews practice their faith is none of yours.

I would add that I don't reject the Jewish Bible, our OT Scriptures. I just reject the Old Covenant, which was exclusively for Jews

Bingo! That's how Jews see it, too.

[Fenris]

The Law was "everlasting" in the sense of being in continuous application, as long as the nation continued to be faithful to their God. Obviously, when Israel turned to idols, the laws ceased to be of application to them

This is a very interesting comment. Because the bible mentions punishments and curses when Jews uphold the law. Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 are terrifying to read. All the more horrible because those curses came true during Jewish history, all of them. But what they don't say is that the law will ever stop being in effect. No matter how disobedient the Jews were, God still expected them return and to uphold the law. There's no opt-out clause. To say that "when Israel turned to idols, the laws ceased to be of application to them" is completely unsupported by the bible.

In Jer 31 we read that the Law of Moses would be replaced with something more secure.

That isn't what is says at all.

Jer 31.31 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
    “when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
    and with the people of Judah.
32 It will not be like the covenant
    I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
    to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
    though I was a husband to them,”
declares the Lord.

Ok, so first we need to give this quote context. You picked two verses from an entire chapter. What does the rest of the chapter say? Starting from verse 7:

This is what the Lord says:

“Sing with joy for Jacob;
    shout for the foremost of the nations.
Make your praises heard, and say,
    ‘Lord, save your people,
    the remnant of Israel.’
 See, I will bring them from the land of the north
    and gather them from the ends of the earth.
Among them will be the blind and the lame,
    expectant mothers and women in labor;
    a great throng will return.
 They will come with weeping;
    they will pray as I bring them back.
I will lead them beside streams of water
    on a level path where they will not stumble,
because I am Israel’s father,
    and Ephraim is my firstborn son.

 “Hear the word of the Lord, you nations;
    proclaim it in distant coastlands:
‘He who scattered Israel will gather them
    and will watch over his flock like a shepherd.’
 For the Lord will deliver Jacob
    and redeem them from the hand of those stronger than they.
 They will come and shout for joy on the heights of Zion;
    they will rejoice in the bounty of the Lord—
the grain, the new wine and the olive oil,
    the young of the flocks and herds.
They will be like a well-watered garden,
    and they will sorrow no more.
 Then young women will dance and be glad,
    young men and old as well.
I will turn their mourning into gladness;
    I will give them comfort and joy instead of sorrow.
 I will satisfy the priests with abundance,
    and my people will be filled with my bounty,”
declares the Lord.

Wow, it's amazing! God is going to gather the Jewish exiles back to the land. He's going to watch over us. What else?

“I have surely heard Ephraim’s moaning:
    ‘You disciplined me like an unruly calf,
    and I have been disciplined.
Restore me, and I will return,
    because you are the Lord my God.
 After I strayed,
    I repented;
after I came to understand,
    I beat my breast.
I was ashamed and humiliated
    because I bore the disgrace of my youth.’
 Is not Ephraim my dear son,
    the child in whom I delight?
Though I often speak against him,
    I still remember him.
Therefore my heart yearns for him;
    I have great compassion for him,”
declares the Lord.

The exiles were punished by suffering in the diaspora. And through that suffering, they repented. And God still loves them and has great compassion for them.

This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: “When I bring them back from captivity, the people in the land of Judah and in its towns will once again use these words: ‘The Lord bless you, you prosperous city, you sacred mountain.’ People will live together in Judah and all its towns—farmers and those who move about with their flocks. I will refresh the weary and satisfy the faint.”

Amazing!

And now we come to your quote, deep in the chapter. So first let's look at the verses you mention, and then more, for even greater context-

“The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
    “when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
    and with the people of Judah.
 It will not be like the covenant
    I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
    to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
    though I was a husband to them,”
declares the Lord.

OK, so first of all, this "new covenant" is with who? "The people of Israel and the people of Judah". Not all the nations in the world. It would have been easy for God to add this, but He did not. Secondly, it says  "new covenant" not "new law". In fact the following verses make this very clear-

“This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel
    after that time,” declares the Lord.
“I will put my law in their minds
    and write it on their hearts...."

It's the same law. Except that we'll do it by our nature, because it will be written in our hearts and minds.

No longer will they teach their neighbor,
    or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
    from the least of them to the greatest,”
declares the Lord.

Knowledge of God will be universal.

And one final promise-

This is what the Lord says,

he who appoints the sun
    to shine by day,
who decrees the moon and stars
    to shine by night,
who stirs up the sea
    so that its waves roar—
    the Lord Almighty is his name:
 “Only if these decrees vanish from my sight,”
    declares the Lord,
“will Israel ever cease
    being a nation before me.”

This is what the Lord says:

“Only if the heavens above can be measured
    and the foundations of the earth below be searched out
will I reject all the descendants of Israel
    because of all they have done,”
declares the Lord.

Which, interestingly enough, also shows up in Leviticus 26, after all the curses-

I will remember my covenant with Jacob and my covenant with Isaac and my covenant with Abraham, and I will remember the land.  For the land will be deserted by them and will enjoy its sabbaths while it lies desolate without them. They will pay for their sins because they rejected my laws and abhorred my decrees.  Yet in spite of this, when they are in the land of their enemies, I will not reject them or abhor them so as to destroy them completely, breaking my covenant with them. I am the Lord their God.  But for their sake I will remember the covenant with their ancestors whom I brought out of Egypt in the sight of the nations to be their God. I am the Lord.’”

"In spite of all this, I will not destroy them or break my covenant with them. I am the Lord their God."

[agnostic]

I don't see the connection. How is saying that the Jewish Law is outdated, but still a matter of relevant black and white morality, depreciating moral commands from God?

The Torah saying of itself that its laws are "everlasting", "forever", and "perpetual" is directly contradictory to the Christian idea that the Torah's laws will come to an end. Calling the Torah "outdated" so that it should no longer to be obeyed is the very opposite of the Torah saying it must be obeyed "through all your generations".

The Law was "everlasting" in the sense of being in continuous application,

My previous question was not rhetorical. I'm looking for a real answer to this: If God wanted to say that the laws in the Torah are literally "everlasting", are literally to be kept "forever", and are literally meant to be obeyed "through all your generations", and that they were never to be "added" to or "removed" from ever -- so that by default the notion of a messiah abrogating most of the laws would be obviously contradictory to what he had said -- what else could he have said to make it any clearer?

Because the Torah is really clearly saying exactly that, so the only way to get around it is to start changing the definitions of basic words to arrive at a predetermined result. You're saying "it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

Take the example of the annual Day of Atonement sacrifice for the sins of the nation. Hebrews says it is inherently flawed and needed replaced with the once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus. But the Torah says the Day of Atonement sacrifice is "an everlasting statute". There's no clearer way the Torah could have said "keep this law forever" than it already does.

as long as the nation continued to be faithful to their God. Obviously, when Israel turned to idols, the laws ceased to be of application to them, and they were cursed almost as if they weren't God's people anymore.

The laws don't cease to be applicable, the laws contain provisions for this situation in Leviticus and Deuteronomy: increasingly severe discipline, the last of which is national exile, followed by restoration of the people to their land and the restoration of obedience to the laws that were broken.

The effort to promote everlasting righteousness is the entire purpose of atonement, to restore a fallen people to a place where only the righteous remain.

Again, this is contrary to what the Torah itself says. The Torah assumes that people will occasionally falter in keeping the laws perfectly. The Torah admits that absolutely perfect obedience to its laws is neither possible nor a reasonable expectation to have. So it provides provisions on how to get back in a right standing with God and continue obeying its laws.

[RandyPNW]

Yea, I know you're sincerely asking the question about the apparent "everlasting" element of the Law. As I told Fenris, a number of Jewish rabbis have admitted that with a change in circumstance, the Law itself changes its demands. For example, when the Messianic Kingdom comes, certain things will no longer be required. And obviously, when Israel went into the Babylonian exile, God never expected them to observe animal sacrifice at a temple that was no longer there.

So the argument is that God tolerates the abrogation of legal observance for awhile, while discipline is in effect, but a return to observing the Law is always expected. You say that because the Law is "everlasting."

But my claim is that the OT Prophets claimed that there would indeed come a breaking point, at which the Law would no longer be applicable. It was referred to as a "divorce," as becoming "not my people," as coming under a "new covenant." You ignore all that.

The Law contained a conditional provision which, if broken, would destroy the deal for all time. An "everlasting" agreement would be terminated. It was "everlasting" only in the sense that it was meant to be perpetual--not eternal.

There is an element of God's covenant with Israel that was eternal, and that had to do with what He promised to do unconditionally. Israel would have some sort of agreement with God forever, though that was never guaranteed to be by an agreement that was conditional.

So we must recognize that there was a conditional aspect to the Law, as well as an unconditional "eternal" aspect to the Law. This explains why God regularly said His Law was "everlasting." It would succeed, but obviously not through the part of the Law that was conditional, and susceptible to failure.

The confusion comes when we render "the Law" the exact equivalent of "God's Word." They are not always the same. The Law of Moses was a provisional agreement in the process of getting Israel to obtain their eternal inheritance. God's Word guaranteed Israel's eternal inheritance. But the Law was just a temporary step to get there.

So the Law was temporary, but it had a perpetual feature to it, namely compliance with God's eternal Law and obtaining His eternal promise. The Law of Moses *contained* God's eternal Law, but but was only temporarily an aspect of God's eternal Law, in particular for Israel. Once the Law of Moses had passed, God's eternal Law remained in force, without the conditional provisions that applied only to Israel. I'll try to deal with this later, when I have more time.

[Fenris]

Yea, I know you're sincerely asking the question about the apparent "everlasting" element of the Law. As I told Fenris, a number of Jewish rabbis have admitted that with a change in circumstance, the Law itself changes its demands.

Whoa now. That's completely different from saying that after the messiah comes, the law will no longer be in effect". If there's no Temple, God doesn't expect sacrifice. That doesn't mean that there will never be sacrifice again. When the second temple was built, sacrifice resumed. When the third temple is built, sacrifice will resume again. Ezekiel goes into exhaustive detail about this.

You're going about stating the Jewish perspective in a very disingenuous way. If I'm not a farmer, then the bible's laws on farming don't apply to me. That doesn't mean they don't apply anymore, period. There's no reason and no biblical text that would leave any Jewish person to believe that the bible's laws will be suspended at some future point. The opposite. I mean, look at Leviticus 23:

 But on the tenth of this seventh month, it is a day of atonement, it shall be a holy occasion for you; you shall afflict yourselves, and you shall offer up a fire offering to the Lord. You shall not perform any work on that very day, for it is a day of atonement, for you to gain atonement before the Lord, your God. For any person who will not be afflicted on that very day, shall be cut off from its people. And any person who performs any work on that very day I will destroy that person from amidst its people. You shall not perform any work. This is an eternal statute throughout your generations in all your dwelling places.

Let's look at that last verse again: This is an eternal statute throughout your generations in all your dwelling places.

Eternal statute. Throughout your generations. In all your dwelling places.

If that doesn't mean "permanent", then what would? Give me the magic phrase that the bible could use that would mean "permanent" to you.

So the argument is that God tolerates the abrogation of legal observance for awhile

No. That's not what it means. The law is not "abrogated". The conditions to fulfill it simply don't exist at a point in time. The law remains in effect however.  Again, if I'm not a farmer, then the laws on farming don't apply to me. That doesn't mean they don't apply at all. If the conditions on the ground change (see what I did there?) then those laws could apply to me.

But my claim is that the OT Prophets claimed that there would indeed come a breaking point, at which the Law would no longer be applicable. It was referred to as a "divorce," as becoming "not my people," as coming under a "new covenant." You ignore all that.

See my commentary on Jeremiah 31. The "new covenant" has the same law.

The Law contained a conditional provision which, if broken, would destroy the deal for all time.

You'll have to show me where this is in the bible. Because I've shown the bible saying the exact opposite. Lev 26, for example "In spite of all this, I will not destroy them or break my covenant with them. I am the Lord their God."

The confusion comes when we render "the Law" the exact equivalent of "God's Word." They are not always the same. The Law of Moses was a provisional agreement in the process of getting Israel to obtain their eternal inheritance.

Again, you'll have to show me where the bible calls it "provisional".

So the Law was temporary

You haven't cited a single bible verse that says this, or anything like this.

[agnostic]

If that doesn't mean "permanent", then what would? Give me the magic phrase that the bible could use that would mean "permanent" to you.

I've asked this twice now as well, and in both replies my question was ignored.

When the Torah records that God declared "these laws are everlasting, forever, perpetual, for all generations, never to be added to or removed from", that is as clear as it can possibly get.

There is no way to answer the question without directly confirming that the Torah already says it.

[agnostic]

But my claim is that the OT Prophets claimed that there would indeed come a breaking point, at which the Law would no longer be applicable. It was referred to as a "divorce," as becoming "not my people," as coming under a "new covenant." You ignore all that.

You provide an example with the "not my people" quote from Hosea. So let's look at that.

Hosea 1:9 Then the LORD said, "Name him Lo-ammi, for you are not my people and I am not your God."

Alright, we've got the part you're saying: the "break" or "divorce." What does the very next verse say?

Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the people of Israel shall be like the sand of the sea, which can be neither measured nor numbered; and in the place where it was said to them, "You are not my people", it shall be said to them, "Children of the living God."

"Yet". A reversal of what came before. Restoration. Where it was said nope, it will be said yep.

Let's look at the next chapter. The first 12 verses are rough, where God disowns his wife Israel and throws her to his enemies. It culminates with God directly saying

Hosea 2:13 I will punish her

Very next verse?

Hosea 2:14 Therefore, I will now persuade her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak tenderly to her.

Restoration. It even mentions a new covenant will be a part of this restoration!

Hosea 2:18-19 I will make for you a covenant on that day ... And I will take you for my wife forever

And he again declares the reversal of "not my people".

Hosea 2:23 And I will have pity on Lo-ruhamah, and I will say to Lo-ammi, "You are my people"; and he shall say, "You are my God."

I'm not "ignoring" the idea that the prophets talk about a divorce, disowning, or rejection. I disagree that your interpretation is correct, because the Torah itself lays out provisions for when its laws are broken: disciplinary punishment because of disobedience, then a later restoration accompanied by obedience. Even the prophets acknowledge this is the case. When you leave out the second half of the story, which the Torah and the prophets are really up-front with, it looks really conspicuous.

The Law contained a conditional provision which, if broken, would destroy the deal for all time.

You're going to need to provide a chapter and verse from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, or Deuteronomy. I can't think of a single point that says what you're claiming it says.

[RandyPNW]

Hosea definitely shows the turn around from "Not My People" to "My People Again." What this shows is that there is a definitive *divorce*--a definitive rupture in the covenant relationship between God and Israel.

Clearly, this was not just a marital separation, and a reconciliation. Rather, this was a divorce, and a renewed union following.

And this is as Jer 31 indicated, a *new covenant* different from the Law of Moses and would reestablish relations between God and Israel. A *new* covenant--a *different* covenant.

[agnostic]

Clearly, this was not just a marital separation, and a reconciliation. Rather, this was a divorce, and a renewed union following.

Right... but my point is, the restoration half is the part you conspicuously leave out. The promise of restoration is in the Torah and in the prophets. It is not a "breaking point" in the way you tried to say before; it is not a permanent abrogation of the Torah's laws opening the way for a messiah to replace it with something entirely different, it is part of the Torah's laws.

[RandyPNW]

Clearly, this was not just a marital separation, and a reconciliation. Rather, this was a divorce, and a renewed union following.

Right... but my point is, the restoration half is the part you conspicuously leave out. The promise of restoration is in the Torah and in the prophets. It is not a "breaking point" in the way you tried to say before; it is not a permanent abrogation of the Torah's laws opening the way for a messiah to replace it with something entirely different, it is part of the Torah's laws.

On the contrary, it is the "restoration" part I'm directly addressing. The restoration is not necessarily the restoration of that which was *completely broken.*

Once there is a final divorce, there is no continuity with the former marriage--what is destroyed cannot be restored. A reunion can be reconsummated, but the old marriage is gone, along with any features associated with it.

If a new marriage to Israel was wished to include the Law of Moses once again, that would've been possible. But the Law is *not necessary* to a relationship in which that Law had been broken and dissolved.

Let's say I had a relationship with a bank in which I owed 100K. Once that debt failed, and reparations had been negotiated, a new agreement with the bank does not necessitate a restoration of a 100K loan.

That agreement had been settled, and a new relationship with the same bank takes on a new form with a different loan and newly-determined conditions. Even if I get a new loan for 100K with the same bank, it is *not* a renewal of or continuation with the former 100K loan.

Once Israel and God had dissolved their partnership under the Law, and had become estranged, their relationship could be restored. But the former partnership had been dissolved--it could not be restored. A new relationship could begin, but the old partnership, with all of its requirements, was gone.

The Torah could be renewed with a restored relationship. But Jer 31  shows that following a complete divorce any new laws associated with a renewed relationship would be different from the original Law of Moses. The relationship is  restored, but not the original Law.

[Fenris]

And this is as Jer 31 indicated, a *new covenant* different from the Law of Moses and would reestablish relations between God and Israel. A *new* covenant--a *different* covenant.

It says what this *different covenant* is in the plain text.

Verse 33-34 “This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time,” declares the Lord.
“I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
No longer will they teach their neighbor, or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest,” declares the Lord.

[Fenris]

Once Israel and God had dissolved their partnership under the Law, and had become estranged, their relationship could be restored.

You know, this "divorce" was only between God and "Israel", that is, the northern ten tribes. Who are indeed lost to history after Assyria conquered them. On the other hand, there's no text of God "divorcing" Judah. Quite the contrary, God still wrought miracles for Judah and did not allow Assyria to conquer them during king Hezekiah's time (which was after Assyria conquered Israel). And the people of Judah have not been lost to history, even after two diasporas, the second lasting nearly 20 centuries. Things that make one think.

[keraz]

Once Israel and God had dissolved their partnership under the Law, and had become estranged, their relationship could be restored.

You know, this "divorce" was only between God and "Israel", that is, the northern ten tribes. Who are indeed lost to history after Assyria conquered them. On the other hand, there's no text of God "divorcing" Judah. Quite the contrary, God still wrought miracles for Judah and did not allow Assyria to conquer them during king Hezekiah's time (which was after Assyria conquered Israel). And the people of Judah have not been lost to history, even after two diasporas, the second lasting nearly 20 centuries. Things that make one think.

Well, I am pleased to see that the it was the ten Northern tribes that were divorced from God and exiled. They are lost to human history but not to God. Amos 9:9 and their exile is for a set period. Ezekiel 4:4-5

It is them who have accepted Christianity, even though they didn't know their origins. Isaiah 51:1-2
God will make a new Covenant with them when they go back to their heritage. Hebrews 8:8-12

Judah has been thrown out of the holy Land twice, but we see in Ezekiel 21:14 how the great Sword of slaughter will strike the three times.  This third strike is prophesied in 20 + scriptures , Ezekiel 21:1-7, being a good example. Only a holy seed of Judah will rejoin their brethren. Isaiah 6:11-13, Romans 9:27