Might as well make use of this space

[Fenris]

So here's my thought.

We all agree that God Himself spoke to the children of Israel at Sinai.

So why should one listen to any person who claims to amend or otherwise alter said covenant? I don't care if that person is Jesus, Paul, or any of you fine people here.

[journeyman]

So here's my thought.

We all agree that God Himself spoke to the children of Israel at Sinai.

So why should one listen to any person who claims to amend or otherwise alter said covenant? I don't care if that person is Jesus, Paul, or any of you fine people here.

The followers of the Messiah don't amend or alter the covenant at Sinai. We simply understand it correctly becauseof him,

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD Jer.31:31-32

For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Heb.8:8

[Fenris]

[The followers of the Messiah don't amend or alter the covenant at Sinai. We simply understand it correctly

To say that you "understand it correctly" is also to amend it.

"You know those laws we've been following since Sinai? It turns out that God doesn't want us to follow them at all".

Why should I do that? Because you said so? Because some guy named Paul or Jesus said so? Well, so what? God said otherwise.

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD Jer.31:31-32

Yes, and so what? It says God will make a new covenant. Not a person, no matter what claims they made. And why am I hearing about this "new covenant" from a person and not God?

[Athanasius]

So here's my thought.

We all agree that God Himself spoke to the children of Israel at Sinai.

So why should one listen to any person who claims to amend or otherwise alter said covenant? I don't care if that person is Jesus, Paul, or any of you fine people here.

You shouldn't, since it's God's covenant, and only God can amend or otherwise alter it. I suppose that leads into a discussion about the person of Jesus and so on.

[IMINXTC]

So many Jews have also recognized Christ as fulfillment of the Law.


"And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!" Jn 1:29

[journeyman]

To say that you "understand it correctly" is also to amend it.

Only if someone is wrong, but the Messiah is right.

"You know those laws we've been following since Sinai? It turns out that God doesn't want us to follow them at all".

Why should I do that? Because you said so? Because some guy named Paul or Jesus said so? Well, so what? God said otherwise.

Where did Jesus, Paul, or I say that?

Yes, and so what? It says God will make a new covenant. Not a person, no matter what claims they made. And why am I hearing about this "new covenant" from a person and not God?

I told you the law hasn't changed, only our understanding of it and God uses people to spread his message.

[Fenris]

You shouldn't, since it's God's covenant, and only God can amend or otherwise alter it. I suppose that leads into a discussion about the person of Jesus and so on.

It certainly does.

[Fenris]

So many Jews have also recognized Christ as fulfillment of the Law.


"And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!" Jn 1:29

This has nothing whatsoever to do with my original post. Why should I take the word of a person over God? Any person.

[Fenris]

Only if someone is wrong, but the Messiah is right.

Why is he "right"? Because you like what he said? I mean, that's fine and all but he's still a human being contradicting God. Given that dynamic, why should I believe the human being over God?

Where did Jesus, Paul, or I say that?

C'mon, let's not get started on this again. If you don't understand the difference between Judaism and Christianity vis a vis the bible's laws, I'm not going to explain it to you.

I told you the law hasn't changed, only our understanding of it and God uses people to spread his message.

See above.

[RabbiKnife]

Which raises the entire issue of "faith," regardless of one's religion.

Abraham had faith in God, as Abraham understood faith.
Fenris has faith in God, as Fenris understands faith.
I have faith in God, as I understand faith.

At the end of the day, each of us believes God based on our understanding of history, of the history of faith, and on documents that we believe reveal God's interaction with mankind.

Christians claim faith that includes assurance as a result of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

However, at the end of the day, the most basic or the most sophisticated explanations all end up back at faith.  None of us have personal first had physical evidence other than our personal subjective interpretation of our perceived relationship with God.

Fenris has never talked to Moses.  Check.
Fenris has never talked to God at the burning bush. Check.
I did not talk to Jesus at the Transfiguration.  Check.
I was not present at Pentecost.  Check.

So each of us, regardless of our faith, have that faith and exercise that faith based on our trust in historical records and traditions of our fathers.  Past that, it is all metaphysical.

Which is fine, but which does not permit us to condemn.  We can say what our faith teaches us, and why that is important to us, and even why we think it should be important to others.

But at the end of the day, each of us answers to God like Job, naked and alone.

[RabbiKnife]

So here's my thought.

We all agree that God Himself spoke to the children of Israel at Sinai.

So why should one listen to any person who claims to amend or otherwise alter said covenant? I don't care if that person is Jesus, Paul, or any of you fine people here.

You shouldn't, since it's God's covenant, and only God can amend or otherwise alter it. I suppose that leads into a discussion about the person of Jesus and so on.

I think it would be instructive for us Christians for Fenris to help us understand an orthodox Jewish interpretation of Jeremiah 33, because I can promise you that the Christian perspective on "new covenant" is understandably strongly influenced by the Epistle to the Hebrews.

Understanding begins with listening.  We don't have to agree.  For pity sake, Fenris has authorized me to eat all of his allotment of non-kosher bacon, but then, I've authorized him to eat all of my allotment of gefillte fish, nu?

[Fenris]

Which raises the entire issue of "faith," regardless of one's religion.

Yes that's very true, but it doesn't really address my point. How does a person, any person, get to override God? Here's the set of rules that have been in effect since Sinai, but because a person said they're no applicable anymore I am somehow free to ignore them? I don't care who that person is or who they claim to be.

[Fenris]

I think it would be instructive for us Christians for Fenris to help us understand an orthodox Jewish interpretation of Jeremiah 33

I don't think that it's relevant to the discussion at hand, but for clarity and politeness I'll address the point.

First, the understanding that Jeremiah 31 contains more than verse 31. Some Chrisitians have this interesting habit of using a verse as "proof" of something while ignoring the surrounding verses, I don't know, as if the verse is in it's own chapter. (Or a chapter as if it is it's own book; There's apparently a book called "Isaiah 53" which has a mysterious unnamed "suffering servant" who is actually identified by name something like 9 times between Isaiah 40 and Isaiah 52; but that's apparently a different book and so it doesn't count for most Christians).

What's the topic of Jeremiah 31? The ESV gives the chapter the following heading: "The Lord Will Turn Mourning to Joy". Why? Well, let's see some verses. Verse 1: "At that time, declares the Lord, I will be the God of all the clans of Israel, and they shall be my people.”

Verse 3: I have loved you with an everlasting love;  therefore I have continued my faithfulness to you.

Verses 7-9 For thus says the Lord: “Sing aloud with gladness for Jacob, and raise shouts for the chief of the nations; proclaim, give praise, and say,      ‘O Lord, save your people,   the remnant of Israel.’ Behold, I will bring them from the north country and gather them from the farthest parts of the earth, among them the blind and the lame, the pregnant woman and she who is in labor, together;  a great company, they shall return here. With weeping they shall come, and with pleas for mercy I will lead them back, I will make them walk by brooks of water, in a straight path in which they shall not stumble, for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.

The beautiful and  perfect verse 10: “Hear the word of the Lord, O nations,  and declare it in the coastlands far away; say, ‘He who scattered Israel will gather him,  and will keep him as a shepherd keeps his flock.’

Verses 15-17: Thus says the Lord: “A voice is heard in Ramah,   lamentation and bitter weeping. Rachel is weeping for her children;     she refuses to be comforted for her children,    because they are no more.”
Thus says the Lord: “Keep your voice from weeping,  and your eyes from tears, for there is a reward for your work, declares the Lord,  and they shall come back from the land of the enemy. There is hope for your future,
declares the Lord,  and your children shall come back to their own country.

I think that's enough to prove the point: This chapter is about the ingathering of the Jewish exiles in the messianic era. (If you think it means something else then you're ignoring the plain text and that's a different discussion).

In the context of the messianic era, we will now look at verse 31. "“Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah."

Let's read that again. “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah"

The house of Israel and the house of Judah. Not the whole world, who was not part of either the Abrahamic covenant or the one at Sinai. Not the gentiles. Just the Jews.

And what does this new covenant look like?

"...not like the covenant that I made with their fathers..."

Ah, it's different. And in what was is it different?

"...For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. ...

God will put His law within us.

It's not a "new law" (or "no law at all") It's the same law as we obey now. The difference is, it will be "written on our hearts". It will be our nature to keep the bible's laws. The Sabbath and the dietary laws and everything else.

Understanding begins with listening.  We don't have to agree.  For pity sake, Fenris has authorized me to eat all of his allotment of non-kosher bacon, but then, I've authorized him to eat all of my allotment of gefillte fish, nu?

You're missing out, my wife's gefilte fish is outstanding. Perhaps you'll be around to try it someday. 

[RabbiKnife]

Which raises the entire issue of "faith," regardless of one's religion.

Yes that's very true, but it doesn't really address my point. How does a person, any person, get to override God? Here's the set of rules that have been in effect since Sinai, but because a person said they're no applicable anymore I am somehow free to ignore them? I don't care who that person is or who they claim to be.

I agree that humans do not have the power to override God, but then, to be fair, Christians believe that they have heard from God, in the person of Jesus, who has the power to revise or renew or replace or fulfill or whatever you want to call it the original covenant; of course, all that being very simplified and contingent on whether the person claiming the power to change is God Himself.

That's all I was getting at, is that Christians obviously believe they have heard from God just as much as Moses heard from God or Abraham heard from God.

So no Christian, of course, claims that a human can override God.

[RabbiKnife]

You're missing out, my wife's gefilte fish is outstanding. Perhaps you'll be around to try it someday. 

If I ever wander back into a blue state!  I think right now I would probably be detained at the border on general principles!