"And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy."
Deuteronomy 7:9
"Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;"
Isaiah 55:7
"Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon."
Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;"
Did not Paul say to Timothy " ye have the scriotures which are able to make you wise unto salvation" Given that he had then only the Old Testament the way of salvation was laid out also there and first mentioned By God in the garden of Eden .
The list in Hebrews of those people of faith starting at Abel proves it so .
Though they " were not perfected" without us "of the New Testament.They looked forward to Calvary we look back to it but both look forward to the coming of the Lord . Seeking a city that has foundations and built by God..
"They looked forward to Calvary we look back to it but both look forward to the coming of the Lord . Seeking a city that has foundations and built by God"
As Chris points out. In the Septuagint, which the NT apostles quoted from, uses the word "ecclesia" which means congregation/assembly of the called out ones. The Septuagint uses the word ecclesia in reference to the Israelite nation in the wilderness ( Acts 7:38, Deut. 18:16, ; 23:1; Ps. 26:12) Just as there is the visible ecclesia now and the invisible ecclesia (which includes all true believers), there was the visible ecclesia in the wilderness and the invisible ecclesia (which included all true believers such as Moses, Caleb, Joshua, and those who entered the land of Canaan who had faith as Abraham did.
The question is. Why didn't God take the souls of the righteous of the OT in Heaven instead of sending them temporarily in Hades? The answer is that because the Blood of Jesus had not been shed yet. And without His blood nobody goes to Heaven. Why not?
Hebrews 9:22, "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission."
Any blood? Hebr 10:4, "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins."
Only Christ's Blood cleans people's sins. Rom 3:25, "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;"
So we the believers now,"19Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;" Hebr 10:19-20.
But that was not the case with the OT Jews. Yes they were righteous in the sense that they obeyed God's commandements at those ages, yes they walked with God, BUT without Jesus' Blood they were in no way without sin. So they didn't have the right to enter the Holy of the Holies which means in the very presence of God. So God left them temporarily in a nice plce to be comforted until Jesus' Blood was shed. And onwards His resurrection He cariried their souls in Heaven under the altar together with all other souls of the righteous waiting for the resurrection of the dead. The latter is a common belief of many christian churches.
Eden can be a physical type to the true antitype of the New Earth. When Adam and Eve were placed into the Garden which was a physical type to the true antitype of the New Jerusalem) in Eden God had created for them, He walked among them, conversing with them and in intimate fellowship with them. When they sinned, this relationship was lost to them and they could no longer live in the Garden. They did not had it in them to fix this situation. God promised them a Messiah to redeem them and their sinful posterity from the corruption that became real in each of us as a result of the work of Satan in their midst. Jesus was that promised Seed pf Gen. 3:17 at on the cross of His death He completely overturned the work of Satan, triumphing over Satan unequivocally and this victory He bestows upon those He saves.
The New Earth (restored Eden) and New Jerusalem (the perfected Garden where the evil one no longer has access to as he did in Genesis) is the consummation of history, the "teleos" ) (desired end of God's creation, full completion of all of His eternal purposes, and the "better heavenly country" than Eden (or even eretz Ysrael) that is superior to all that the first creation involved before sin came to be. It is the restoration of ALL things promised in Acts 3:21 which is simply the fulfillment of Eph. 1:9-10 where God brings ALL THINGS in heaven and earth together in Christ. This is the reality of the New Jerusalem-the union of all believers with Jesus in Him and He in us. Rev. 21:1-5 refers to this as well.
It is God marrying heaven and earth both physically and spiritually where He brings His very real and superior, heavenly, spiritual kingdom to earth forever where only righteousness dwell. Physical and Spiritual aspects of His entire creation are merged where His will is done on earth as it is in heaven because they are both interpenetrated with each other.
This is what Jesus told us to pray for when He taught the disciples to pray.
The righteousness of God is not by " obeying His commandments" but by faith in Gods good work of Calvary . It has always been thus . Abel offered a Lamb by faith in the promise of God .
Caine did not seeking to establish his own; righteousness by the " sweat of his brow" .
In so doing he denied Gods righteousness and sought his own glory .
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence if things as yet unseen".
All men have this faith according to what it IS . " Fir God has given to every man a measure of faith to profit withall".
While all men have faith not all have their faith in God . But theur faith still works by what faith IS .
But it is short lived in that " the things that are seen are temporary but the things that are not seen are eternal "
The laws of physics are not seen but people understanding them act accordingly .
In my comment I wrote "The Masoretic text is a least a thousand years older than the Septuagint" but it is the opposite. "The Septuagint is 1000 years older than the Masoretic"
The Septuagint also contain what we call the "Apocrypha". But that was done only because the Jews were reading them at that time. Otherwise why would they include those? Later on when the Jews canonized the OT they left them out. In Jesus' time Jews were reading them. Something similar happened to christians. Before the NT was canonized many churches were using books that were left out later on. The "Shepherd of Hermas" was such a book. Another was the "Teaching of the 12 apostles" and many others that were very popular among the christians of the first 3 centuaries AD. But were left out later on.
In my church we use the Masoretic but sometimes I personally consult the Septuagint, although not so often.
And there are churches like the Eastern Ortodox church who have standardized the Septuagint as the right text.
Anyway I don't think it makes that much difference which OT we use.
About the Septuagint. It is logical that the evangelists quoted from the Septuagint since there was no other translation available at that time. But by doing so they were actually recomended it. Because one never uses something which they consider as corrupt. And if they do so, still they do not say it to others, because they know that others will do the same.
The Septuagint raised a substantial objection starting from the early age of the church. Some said that in many cases it was an interpretation rather than a translation or it was a paraphrase. Maybe yes, but maybe no.
The Masoretic text is a least a thousand years older than the Septuagint. And often christians accused the Jews that they changed the text to wipe out anything that reveals Christ. I have mentioned that "virgin" or the verse that Paul uses in Hebrews (10:5) to show them a verse for Christ. There is a world difference between the Septuagint "but a body hast thou prepared me" and the Masoretic "mine ears hast thou opened". There is also a world difference between the "and upon the holy place there shall be the abomination of desolation," which Jesus said and the "and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate.". Don't you agree on that? So Jesus had some other text in mind than what we know today as the Masoretic? Or is it true that the Jews changed the text to fit their point of view.
About the later verse I quoted Jerom's translation in Vulgate Latin which was done during the 3rd century AD. Jerom did his own translationdirectly from the Hebrew scriptures. But his translation is almost identical to the Septuagint and completely different from the Masoretic. So where is the truth?
Yes Jesus' sacrifice gets you out of Egypt (figuratively) and places one in the begining of the path which leads to the promise land. This is the narrow path which leads to Heaven for us the christians. On the way there one must stay on this path otherwise they will end somewhere else but not in Heaven. Different roads lead to diffent destinations. There is only one road that leads to Heaven. This road/path is along Jesus' footprints whose steps are on God's commandements. So obeying God's commandements is actually walking on the right path. There is no way that one is saved when disobeying God's commandements.
Think about it in another way. If one refuses to do God's will (even if they are saved) then they have a sin in their lives, because disobeying God is sin. If one never repents about it, then I am sorry they can not be saved. Remember that parable that Jesus said about entering the marriage meal and found one who was not dressed appropriately for the marriage. What are those clothes? They are the white clothes we are dressed. White means pure, sinless. No man with sin/sins will ever enter the marriage.
There is a world difference (as you say) between not been able to do what is aked from me by God so I cry to God for help and between being negligible or unwilling to do what is commanded. In that latter case God is ot any more on our side. His grace has gone. But still God is our father and works all the time in our heart to bring us back to the right path. But the decision to do what is asked by God and not do it, is on me, not on God. God will try to save me even at the last minute of my life but who can be so silly to risk such a thing. We are talking about the eternal life, not about some earthly things.
So obeying God is very essential for our salvation.
The getting out of Egypt was from slavery to bondage . From being no people to Gods people .it is being ' born again" by the blood of a lamb ,the power of God and the Word of God .
From the dominion of Pharaoh ( Satan) and from the bondage of the world ( Egypt) .
I say again the promised land so often depicted as Heaven and which you repeat is not heaven. For there are no giants in heaven or cities to conquer . The Bible is consistent with itself .
And Jordan is not death but many a hymn has them both .
In truth Jordan does mean descent and is a form of death but it is the death of baptism I being " buried WITH Christ " ..
The wilderness journey from Egypt to Jordon and the borders of Canaan called the promised land took a bit over two years . Not 40. The wilderness journey was boot camp where a civilian is changed into a soldier .Where he learns to obey orders or as the scriptures put it " to prove them " that they learn that " man does not live by bread alone but by everybWord that proceeds from the mouth of God" .
Instead they kept proving God forever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth. Out of over 2000,000 people who came out of Egypt only TWO actually entered . SomGod was justified in expecting them all to be ready the first time .
By your reasoning if the promised land was heaven then that is quite appalling .
I say again . The church has made the wandering in the wilderness for 40: years as the Christian norm .
They had miracles every day twice on Saturday . The fire and cloudy pillar and much else besides .God did not leave them but they were out of the centre of Gods will. Paul is not speaking about heaven nor is God when " they entered not in because of unbelief ".
The unbelief today we must face and repent of .
We have for instance made the 10 virgins a message and bout the saved and the unsaved . When it's a message fir the church . Has changed the message " behold I stand oat the door and knock " likewise .
Thanks brother, I have nothing more to add. And I don't think we are that much far away in our beliefs as it seems from our discussion. Forget the Septuagint, I only refered to it in order to make clear some things written in the NT. Have a blessed week.
Here in this post you are spiritualizing what getting out of Egypt means where the actual text of Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy do not speak of it as such. According to your view of not spiritualizing what is a factual account or literal text then you are just as guilty of this as I am in how I viewed the New Jerusalem. Please, be consistent.
I know that how I interpreted the New Jerusalem does not fit into your dispensational literal approach to Revelation, but your approach does not apply to how others may approach this book. If you spiritualize the Exodus from Egypt, then certainly I can apply a similar Scriptural approach to text such as Revelation.
I am not trying to drum up a debate but when I find people speak about, promote, and insist on interpreting the Scripture literally, yet they employ other methods such as spiritualizing, seeing some text as figurative, allegorical, metaphorical, or symbolic as you have done with the Exodus as many dispensationalists indeed do, only to criticize a non-dispensationalist when they view some texts as literal, figurative, typological, metaphorical, etc. then I call that hypocrisy as well as a disingenuous way of approaching someone who thinks in a different way.
I am fine with dispensationalists seeking to interpret Scripture literally as well as all the other ways I listed because the Bible language is not all a literal account or statement. Often what is said in Scriptures describe spiritual realties and truth in language that seems to mean something literal, such as apostles being pillars in the foundations of the temple or the New Jerusalem in Revelation or when Jesus tells the disciples and believers they will sit on His throne as He sits on the Father's throne Rev. 3:21.
It would be absurd for these things to be literal, whether human pillars or all believers sitting upon Jesus on His throne and Jesus and all believers sitting on the Father's throne. These are to be viewed as spiritual realities.
My one point, and I may be way off on this, but when we read about the heavenly Jerusalem descending to earth, it is symbolic, not a literal building or physical city. It represents something heavenly coming to earth.
In my understanding, it represents the antitype of the OT temple, which was a type of what was heavenly as it says in Ex. that the earthly temple is made after the pattern in heaven shown to Moses ( Exodus 25-27).
This heavenly antitype, the true reality, is what descends to the New Earth from the New Heaven. It is God's heavenly throne (power, authority, dominion) come to earth in the heavenly New Jerusalem. The New Jerusalem is the Body of Christ in which God dwells eternally. There is no need for a physical temple in the New Jerusalem because the Lord Almighty and the Lamb (Jesus) are the temple whom forever indwells the Church, the Body of Christ, which the New Jerusalem description symbolizes, representing and intimate (as in a bride and bridegroom who become one in marriage), unmediated, direct and eternal relationship of believers with God. Rev. 21:21-22 speaks of this symbolism, with the glory of the God being the eternal light of the New Jerusalem and the Lamb (Jesus) is the lamp, so no sun is needed and there is no night in this realm because it is the kingdom of light without darkness, that is pure, holy, and sinless.
In Rev. 3 the term temple is used as a metaphor the the body of Christ with believers being called pillars and other parts of the temple as if they are physically built into a physical temple, just as Paul says that believers are living stones being built into a temple of God with Jesus being the chief cornerstone, the stone that the builders (Ethnic Israel who built the physical 1st and 2nd temple which was expanded, embellished, and made magnificent by Herod) rejected. The Jews rejected Jesus the foundational element Scripture speaks of throughout. See pt. 2
The figurative language of this chapter and the apocalyptic nature of the book of Revelation lends toward taking this topic in a figurative sense as representing something very real, substantive, yet spiritual, the body of Christ as the tabernacle in which God dwells forever with the redeemed is quite applicable to this New Jerusalem.
Therefore, although you seem to have a negative view of such things as typology, metaphors, figures, and such, I think it makes the most sense that the New Jerusalem is not an physical city, but demonstrates the state of our eternal union with God.
If you can tell me how apostles can actually be physical pillars and foundations and stones of this city, and how Jesus can actually be a cornerstone, or a body made up of millions of physical individuals then that is another matter, but as it seems to me that such identification is actually figuratively written to reveal realities we just do not yet truly know at this time because we are of the earth now and the New Jerusalem is a heavenly and spiritual reality just as real a physical city.
And what is it meant by Heavenly Jerusalem? Rev 21:1-2, "1And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."
The new Jerusalem is the church, the bride of Christ, the Body of Christ. Are the saints of the OT included in the Bride? Yes we both are fellow citizens.
Hebr 11:16, "But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a CITY." This verse refers to the heros of faith before Christ.
2. Where were the souls of the OT saints were going to in the OT era? In the story of the rich man and Lazarus both the wicked and the righteous were going down to earth in a place called by the evangelists as "Hades" (in KJB is written as Hell). This term was also taken from the Septuagint who translated the Hebrew word "sheol" as "Hades", in this way showing that what was meant by Jews of that time with the word Sheol was not the grave but a place down the earth where the souls of the dead were going to.
In that place there were two compartments, one for the wicked who were tortured and one for the righteous who were comforted.
When Jesus was crucified He said to that criminal crucified next to Him who repented that he would be in Paradise with Him soon. Paul in his epistles wishes to go with Christ in heaven after dying. In Rev we see the souls of the slaughtered believers under the altar of the Temple in Heaven. Under the altar means under Jesus' sacrifice . So when Jesus was resurrected from the dead He took all the souls of the saints of the OT, and before that age such as Noah and others, into Heaven.
Probably because they wanted to discriminate themselves from the Jews. Because in that early era the danger to Christianity was not due to heresies but due to Jewish traditions and oracles that some wanted to adopt into the new faith. We see in the Acts that the Jewish believers could not cut ties with the Law, so that even when Paul went to Jerusalem, James adviced him to pretend that he didn't teach the Jews abroad against the Law (which Paul was actually doing it).
To be honest I would like to know how Jesus called the gathering. Jesus was not speaking in grk but in Aramaic, So He used a specific Jewish or Aramaic word, Maybe the one used in the OT for Israel. We don't know. But the evangelists who wrote the gospels translated it in grk as church. With the word Church it is definately meant the one body of Hebrews and gentiless who believe in Christ. But not the Jews before Him in the OT. The church was formed on Pentecost so it includes people from that time till the end.
Ephesians 2:16, "And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:"
It says one body. It is the Body of Christ.
Ephesians 2:19-22,
"19Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit"
It says we have become fellow citizens. Of which state? Hebr 12:22, "But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,"
A lot of debate going on lately. So let me say my beliefs one by one.
Firstly my knee is getting better so I think an operation will not be needed. The doctor said that we see how it goes in the future and then we decide what to do. Nevertheless I wouldn't like to go for an operation. Ten years ago I had a similar injury in my left knee. The doctor said that it would be better to go for an operation. But a friend and brother in Christ, an ex-athlete, insisted that I wouldn't do it. Instead He said it would be a lot better to do weight lifting for my legs. I followed his advice and so after a time I was able to jump, run everything. Sometimes now and then I feel it stiff but nothing serious. I hope your problems with your shoulders go better. Let us not forget that we have a God who heals.
1. Now before talking about the church let me say a bit of information from ancient history.
Today when we say "church" we usually mean the building. This is true for the English speaking people but for modern grks too. But in ancient times church (grk ecclesia), the term meant just a congregation, nomatter if it were a religious or a political or an athletic event. The most famous "church" in anc grc was the "Ecclesia of Demus" (freely translated as "Public Congregation") in the ancient city/state of Athens. It was the gathering of all Athenian citizens at a certain place on certain dates to discuss and decide about their city's affairs. So church was any gathering actually.
When the Septuagint (who were Hebrew teachers and rabbis speaking both Hebrew and grk) translated the OT, translated the Hebrew word for congregation as "church" sometimes but some other times as "synagogue", which also means congregation in grk. The Septuagint of course did not have in mind the christian church. They meant just a gathering of Hebrews.
When the early gentile church was formed, the christians prefferd the term church than synagogue to call their congregation.
I the Greek the word "ecclesia" which means congregation/assembly of the called out ones. The Septuagint uses the word ecclesia.
There's a different word in the Hebrew used in the wilderness equivalent to ecclesia which means "assembly" and is derived from the root word to "gather
The word "QAHAL" means "assembly" or "congregation" and was used to refer to the community of Israel as a whole.
In Matthew 16:18 Jesus says And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
This is future! Jesus is the cornerstone, That's leveling point where the foundation depends on for accuracy!
This is the most important part of a building.
If its off the whole construction project is out of whack!
When the cornerstone is set then comes the foundation. (Apostles)
Afterwards comes the building!
This is the ecclesia! (Jews and Gentiles alike)
The wall of partition has been broken down. Ephesians 2:14.
This group of believers is under a "NEW COVENANT" that is different from the gathering in the wilderness!
When Jesus made this statement the foundation haven't been laid yet.
The cornerstone was set at Jesus crucifixion, afterwards the Holyspirit indwelling beginning with the Apostles. (Foundation)
Afterwords the Church Jesus mentioned in Matthew 16:18.
Note:
The rock is built on the statement Peter made in Matthew 16:16
There is a reason why the Septuagint is not accepted. It's because it is based on such corrupted texts it is completely unreliable and contradictory to those texts that are.
And while you say the apostles quoted from it ,that does not mean at all they were speaking about the same tbing.
And let us face it . We have what we have for centuries and still have not exhausted it but have rather sought to have other 'versions' for it is said because " of our better understanding" but prove they have little or none and it is very doubtful if they know God at all .
The Bible is in many ways like a jigsaw puzzle . The " milk" of the Word being the sides and corners . For no matter how big the puzzle they are the easiest to find first .
Once the framework is up with its four corners . We know that everything is inside it and there is nothing outside it . I wonder if that is meant by "found wanting"? That is outside Chrsist .
But that is another matter .
The hardest parts are the sky ( heavenly) for it is so contrary to our old nature .I think .
So most if not everyone starts with the earthly things .
Me I start with lines whatever sort they are,
We get clumps of pieces which we put here and there but often find we have put them in the wrong place and need to adjust . But if we continue clumps join to clumps and perhaps long before the puzzle is finished we 'see' the picture or understand in some measure . It then can get easier and we make less mistakes .
We don't force pieces into where wet hunk they should go ,but learn to be patient .
I've been studying and thinking about the Scriptures for over 40 years ,I don't need to go anywhere else or find another version to make it easier . If I go to university it does not conform to me but seeks to bring me up to them.
They don't bring the language down to my level but seek to bring mine up to it.
And if things are " sometimes hard to understand" ( said Peter) what of it?
The Apostles did quote from the Septuagint being written in the Greek that was the common language at the time and also a more precise language that Hebrew or our English. These godly men inspired by the Holy Spirit to use the Septuagint (even though Paul knew Hebrew. There is no way or your to know if the Septuagint, written around the 3rd century B.C. was corrupted, but the Holy Spirit inspired apostles to use it, so He must have approved it for use by the Scripture writes.
There are many good books on which Bible to read and why . Anyone seriously interested in why shouid read them and any goid Bible book shop will have them. From quite basic to the very academic .
I disagree with you completely about ANY extra books and given the p,et Nora of ' versions' of the Bible today that are plainly wrong despite their boasts their " better understanding" rhey should all be thrown away . As for those 'traditionally ' added to the cannon of scripture I hold them false as well despite what you have said and are mistaken in their validity .
The KJV authorised I've never found wanting unreliable or untruthful . After 40 years of study and thought it is still inexhaustible .
I neither need to go elsewhere or recommend anyone else to do so ,it's a path that will lead to trouble and mischief. I'm not clever enough to play cards with the devil or be in such foolish debates .
We are living in the end times and while many claim holy inspiration none show it . So I decline to go down " by pass meadow '.
People have enough trouble understanding the cannon of scripture you wouod seem to want to add to their troubles .
Hi bro. S. Spencer. I believe there were many under the Old Covenant that were saved. We tend to define 'salvation' in NT terms, requiring genuine repentance and belief in Christ Jesus' salvific Work on the Cross. But as a fundamental definition, 'salvation granted' in God's terms, would be His full acceptance of those who are right before Him (both in faith and its resulting fruit).
As you know, Hebrews chapter 11 is the classic example of the few folk mentioned whom God accepted, by their faith, not having received the promise (of the coming Deliverer, Debt-payer and the hope of eternal life). And in closing that chapter, the writer declares, "And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect."
Not having received the promise as yet, the OT saints waited in faith, in a faithful God. God having accepted them by their faith & patient waiting, yet their perfection was still to be realized through the merits of the Cross, the New Covenant in Christ's Blood, and the ultimate fulfilling of God's Promises to Abraham. And that same faith in a loving God is what we express today; so together, they, with us, can now enjoy both spiritual and eternal perfection through the Son of God. Without Jesus, any faith or hope we exhibit would all be vanity, but in Christ we have "an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast", Who keeps and sustains the saints of old and us today securely and eternally. GBU.
There's those in the OT that passed on that is not considered part of the new covenant and is not part of Christ Church.
They were saved by faith but under the old covenant and rituals that pointed to their Messiah's finish work on the cross freeing them from the bondage that held them captive.
The difference between Israel and the rest of the world was that they were heirs of the land, Davidic and Kingdom promises to Abraham.
(Not to be mistaken for the recipient of the promises shown mentioned in Galatians 3:29 referring to Christ.)
However we all should know there's no entering into the presence of God without the door. John 10:9. That goes for all ages.
These specific promises is after the Gathering of the Gentiles into the body of Christ. "The Church" as shown in Acts 15:14-16
"Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
"AFTER THIS" I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
The old testament prophets prophesied about the gather of Israel, (Post Church) and the Davidic Kingdom.
References-
Romans 11:25-26.
Romans 9:25-26 echoing Hosea 2:23.
Isaiah 40:9
Joel 2:3-32.
Isaiah 11:11-12.
The Lord calls Zion(Israel) his people several times in these verses.
..2:18 Then will the LORD be jealous for his land, and pity HIS PEOPLE.
In Isaiah 11:11 the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people.
This is not the Church but a people and elect of God for the purpose of God!
The salvation of God was and has always been through Jesus Christ . I wouod agree with you that people were saved before the first coming of the Lord but were " not perfected without us" .
Did not Paul say to Timothy " you have the s ruptures that are able to make you wise unto salvation"?Given that the New Testament scriptures were not yet written or collated he was speaking primarily of the Old Testament .
Thus we can see the way of salvation first laid out in the garden of Eden when God spoke of the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent the enmity between them and that there would come one ( "it") born of a woman ( a man) but not of Adams seed ( the seed of the woman) who would bruise the serpents head ( fatal) and in the doing have his heel bruised .
Abel thus conformed to way of God ,Cain did not .thus we have THE faith once and for all delivered to the saints" and the vain hope ( not faith) of false religions of works ( by the sweat of the brow").
Shouid we consider that the children of Isreal knew Gods works but Moses knew His ways"The whole world knows Gods works but how many know His ways?
"God knoweth the way of the righteous .( He has walked it before us all ). But the way of the wicked perishes".
The new Jerusalem is I believe more than' a symbol' But a physical reality for God has more 'substance' than any chair we might be sitting on . Though as you said the Union of both Jewish and Gentile believers into one body will be the most wonderful fulfilment of the ages and in the new heaven and earth "God will fill all in all".
I recall how Jesus spoke to the teachers of the Torah saying that they diligently search it, but fail to realize that it was written about Jesus from start to finish. Having such a Christocentric view of the Scriptures and building one's hermeneutic and theology upon this focus seems to me to be the key to understanding all Scripture. When Jesus finally was incarnated in the "Last days" He ushered in a new way for not only the Jews for all who were, are, and will be reached with the Jesus' one gospel and believe that He is the one and only promised Messiah and Savior for all who put their trust in Him because He lived a perfect life, died a sacrificial death to forgive and destroy sin in those who believe on Him, and resurrected from the dead victoriously, and ascended to the right hand of the Father to rule and reign forever because He received all power and authority from the Father to do so.
This Christocentric view of Scriptures I have always held to throughout my life. Up until just the past few years, all I read was the Scriptures always knowing that Scriptures point to Jesus and so we should be looking for how Christ and His work of redemption for us is revealed and emphasized. He truly is worthy of all of our diligence in seeking to gain understanding of Scripture.
It is late here. I just got up to have a midnight snack. Glad I checked in here. Your thoughts align with my thoughts earlier this evening on Jesus being the center of all that God does in creation, time, space, and history.
Thanks GiGi. As I read your sentence, "I recall how Jesus spoke to the teachers of the Torah saying that they diligently search it, but fail to realize that it was written about Jesus from start to finish", I believe you were referring to John 5:39, "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
They were diligent in their religious studies, whether in search of the Scriptures that gave them assurance of eternal life, or by doing so, God would have approved & rewarded their hunger to be with Him. But they missed the central thread running throughout the Word about the Giver of salvation and eternal life. Had they searched diligently for the Messiah, alert to the many prophecies about Him and His Coming, they might have learned that the eternal life they searched for was in their Messiah's possession, ready to impart it.
And in despair (as I read it), Jesus spoke to them, "And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life" ( John 5:40). He was right there with them, the fulfilment of the prophecies about Him, and they still refused to believe in Him, thus forgoing the eternal life they longed for. Reminds me of the times when an answer to a problem stares me in the face, but I just don't see it. Though fortunately for some of them, their blinders were lifted off as the penny dropped, embracing the promised Messiah, the Son of God. Thanks for your added thoughts Gigi on what should be our Christocentric understanding of the whole Word of God.
A well known quote of Jesus from Matthew 16:18 l.
Most agree that "this Church" started at Pentecost. This is no doubt a people of God
Question.
We're there any people saved in the OT?
"And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy."
Deuteronomy 7:9
"Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;"
Isaiah 55:7
"Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon."
Blessings
Great verse that we should keep in memory!
Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;"
Isaiah 55:7
Blessings.
The list in Hebrews of those people of faith starting at Abel proves it so .
Though they " were not perfected" without us "of the New Testament.They looked forward to Calvary we look back to it but both look forward to the coming of the Lord . Seeking a city that has foundations and built by God..
Correct. Those saints of the OT believed God that the Messiah would be sent from God.
"They looked forward to Calvary we look back to it but both look forward to the coming of the Lord . Seeking a city that has foundations and built by God"
God bless!
As Chris points out. In the Septuagint, which the NT apostles quoted from, uses the word "ecclesia" which means congregation/assembly of the called out ones. The Septuagint uses the word ecclesia in reference to the Israelite nation in the wilderness ( Acts 7:38, Deut. 18:16, ; 23:1; Ps. 26:12) Just as there is the visible ecclesia now and the invisible ecclesia (which includes all true believers), there was the visible ecclesia in the wilderness and the invisible ecclesia (which included all true believers such as Moses, Caleb, Joshua, and those who entered the land of Canaan who had faith as Abraham did.
The question is. Why didn't God take the souls of the righteous of the OT in Heaven instead of sending them temporarily in Hades? The answer is that because the Blood of Jesus had not been shed yet. And without His blood nobody goes to Heaven. Why not?
Hebrews 9:22, "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission."
Any blood? Hebr 10:4, "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins."
Only Christ's Blood cleans people's sins. Rom 3:25, "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;"
So we the believers now,"19Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;" Hebr 10:19-20.
But that was not the case with the OT Jews. Yes they were righteous in the sense that they obeyed God's commandements at those ages, yes they walked with God, BUT without Jesus' Blood they were in no way without sin. So they didn't have the right to enter the Holy of the Holies which means in the very presence of God. So God left them temporarily in a nice plce to be comforted until Jesus' Blood was shed. And onwards His resurrection He cariried their souls in Heaven under the altar together with all other souls of the righteous waiting for the resurrection of the dead. The latter is a common belief of many christian churches.
A long respont, isn't it? Have a blessed week.
Part 2
Eden can be a physical type to the true antitype of the New Earth. When Adam and Eve were placed into the Garden which was a physical type to the true antitype of the New Jerusalem) in Eden God had created for them, He walked among them, conversing with them and in intimate fellowship with them. When they sinned, this relationship was lost to them and they could no longer live in the Garden. They did not had it in them to fix this situation. God promised them a Messiah to redeem them and their sinful posterity from the corruption that became real in each of us as a result of the work of Satan in their midst. Jesus was that promised Seed pf Gen. 3:17 at on the cross of His death He completely overturned the work of Satan, triumphing over Satan unequivocally and this victory He bestows upon those He saves.
The New Earth (restored Eden) and New Jerusalem (the perfected Garden where the evil one no longer has access to as he did in Genesis) is the consummation of history, the "teleos" ) (desired end of God's creation, full completion of all of His eternal purposes, and the "better heavenly country" than Eden (or even eretz Ysrael) that is superior to all that the first creation involved before sin came to be. It is the restoration of ALL things promised in Acts 3:21 which is simply the fulfillment of Eph. 1:9-10 where God brings ALL THINGS in heaven and earth together in Christ. This is the reality of the New Jerusalem-the union of all believers with Jesus in Him and He in us. Rev. 21:1-5 refers to this as well.
It is God marrying heaven and earth both physically and spiritually where He brings His very real and superior, heavenly, spiritual kingdom to earth forever where only righteousness dwell. Physical and Spiritual aspects of His entire creation are merged where His will is done on earth as it is in heaven because they are both interpenetrated with each other.
This is what Jesus told us to pray for when He taught the disciples to pray.
Caine did not seeking to establish his own; righteousness by the " sweat of his brow" .
In so doing he denied Gods righteousness and sought his own glory .
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence if things as yet unseen".
All men have this faith according to what it IS . " Fir God has given to every man a measure of faith to profit withall".
While all men have faith not all have their faith in God . But theur faith still works by what faith IS .
But it is short lived in that " the things that are seen are temporary but the things that are not seen are eternal "
The laws of physics are not seen but people understanding them act accordingly .
But that is the natural mirroring the spiritual .
In my comment I wrote "The Masoretic text is a least a thousand years older than the Septuagint" but it is the opposite. "The Septuagint is 1000 years older than the Masoretic"
The Septuagint also contain what we call the "Apocrypha". But that was done only because the Jews were reading them at that time. Otherwise why would they include those? Later on when the Jews canonized the OT they left them out. In Jesus' time Jews were reading them. Something similar happened to christians. Before the NT was canonized many churches were using books that were left out later on. The "Shepherd of Hermas" was such a book. Another was the "Teaching of the 12 apostles" and many others that were very popular among the christians of the first 3 centuaries AD. But were left out later on.
In my church we use the Masoretic but sometimes I personally consult the Septuagint, although not so often.
And there are churches like the Eastern Ortodox church who have standardized the Septuagint as the right text.
Anyway I don't think it makes that much difference which OT we use.
GBU
About the Septuagint. It is logical that the evangelists quoted from the Septuagint since there was no other translation available at that time. But by doing so they were actually recomended it. Because one never uses something which they consider as corrupt. And if they do so, still they do not say it to others, because they know that others will do the same.
The Septuagint raised a substantial objection starting from the early age of the church. Some said that in many cases it was an interpretation rather than a translation or it was a paraphrase. Maybe yes, but maybe no.
The Masoretic text is a least a thousand years older than the Septuagint. And often christians accused the Jews that they changed the text to wipe out anything that reveals Christ. I have mentioned that "virgin" or the verse that Paul uses in Hebrews (10:5) to show them a verse for Christ. There is a world difference between the Septuagint "but a body hast thou prepared me" and the Masoretic "mine ears hast thou opened". There is also a world difference between the "and upon the holy place there shall be the abomination of desolation," which Jesus said and the "and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate.". Don't you agree on that? So Jesus had some other text in mind than what we know today as the Masoretic? Or is it true that the Jews changed the text to fit their point of view.
About the later verse I quoted Jerom's translation in Vulgate Latin which was done during the 3rd century AD. Jerom did his own translationdirectly from the Hebrew scriptures. But his translation is almost identical to the Septuagint and completely different from the Masoretic. So where is the truth?
see pt 2
There are good books anyone can find in a goid Bible book shop that proves the case if anyone wants the truth of the matter .
I reject the Vulgate as much as I reject every other 'version' of the Bible that are so popular but misleading .
And in the end will produce fruit after its own kind also .
[Comment Removed]
Yes Jesus' sacrifice gets you out of Egypt (figuratively) and places one in the begining of the path which leads to the promise land. This is the narrow path which leads to Heaven for us the christians. On the way there one must stay on this path otherwise they will end somewhere else but not in Heaven. Different roads lead to diffent destinations. There is only one road that leads to Heaven. This road/path is along Jesus' footprints whose steps are on God's commandements. So obeying God's commandements is actually walking on the right path. There is no way that one is saved when disobeying God's commandements.
Think about it in another way. If one refuses to do God's will (even if they are saved) then they have a sin in their lives, because disobeying God is sin. If one never repents about it, then I am sorry they can not be saved. Remember that parable that Jesus said about entering the marriage meal and found one who was not dressed appropriately for the marriage. What are those clothes? They are the white clothes we are dressed. White means pure, sinless. No man with sin/sins will ever enter the marriage.
There is a world difference (as you say) between not been able to do what is aked from me by God so I cry to God for help and between being negligible or unwilling to do what is commanded. In that latter case God is ot any more on our side. His grace has gone. But still God is our father and works all the time in our heart to bring us back to the right path. But the decision to do what is asked by God and not do it, is on me, not on God. God will try to save me even at the last minute of my life but who can be so silly to risk such a thing. We are talking about the eternal life, not about some earthly things.
So obeying God is very essential for our salvation.
...see pt2
From the dominion of Pharaoh ( Satan) and from the bondage of the world ( Egypt) .
I say again the promised land so often depicted as Heaven and which you repeat is not heaven. For there are no giants in heaven or cities to conquer . The Bible is consistent with itself .
And Jordan is not death but many a hymn has them both .
In truth Jordan does mean descent and is a form of death but it is the death of baptism I being " buried WITH Christ " ..
The wilderness journey from Egypt to Jordon and the borders of Canaan called the promised land took a bit over two years . Not 40. The wilderness journey was boot camp where a civilian is changed into a soldier .Where he learns to obey orders or as the scriptures put it " to prove them " that they learn that " man does not live by bread alone but by everybWord that proceeds from the mouth of God" .
Instead they kept proving God forever learning but never coming to a knowledge of the truth. Out of over 2000,000 people who came out of Egypt only TWO actually entered . SomGod was justified in expecting them all to be ready the first time .
By your reasoning if the promised land was heaven then that is quite appalling .
I say again . The church has made the wandering in the wilderness for 40: years as the Christian norm .
They had miracles every day twice on Saturday . The fire and cloudy pillar and much else besides .God did not leave them but they were out of the centre of Gods will. Paul is not speaking about heaven nor is God when " they entered not in because of unbelief ".
The unbelief today we must face and repent of .
We have for instance made the 10 virgins a message and bout the saved and the unsaved . When it's a message fir the church . Has changed the message " behold I stand oat the door and knock " likewise .
Thanks brother, I have nothing more to add. And I don't think we are that much far away in our beliefs as it seems from our discussion. Forget the Septuagint, I only refered to it in order to make clear some things written in the NT. Have a blessed week.
Here in this post you are spiritualizing what getting out of Egypt means where the actual text of Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy do not speak of it as such. According to your view of not spiritualizing what is a factual account or literal text then you are just as guilty of this as I am in how I viewed the New Jerusalem. Please, be consistent.
I know that how I interpreted the New Jerusalem does not fit into your dispensational literal approach to Revelation, but your approach does not apply to how others may approach this book. If you spiritualize the Exodus from Egypt, then certainly I can apply a similar Scriptural approach to text such as Revelation.
I am not trying to drum up a debate but when I find people speak about, promote, and insist on interpreting the Scripture literally, yet they employ other methods such as spiritualizing, seeing some text as figurative, allegorical, metaphorical, or symbolic as you have done with the Exodus as many dispensationalists indeed do, only to criticize a non-dispensationalist when they view some texts as literal, figurative, typological, metaphorical, etc. then I call that hypocrisy as well as a disingenuous way of approaching someone who thinks in a different way.
I am fine with dispensationalists seeking to interpret Scripture literally as well as all the other ways I listed because the Bible language is not all a literal account or statement. Often what is said in Scriptures describe spiritual realties and truth in language that seems to mean something literal, such as apostles being pillars in the foundations of the temple or the New Jerusalem in Revelation or when Jesus tells the disciples and believers they will sit on His throne as He sits on the Father's throne Rev. 3:21.
It would be absurd for these things to be literal, whether human pillars or all believers sitting upon Jesus on His throne and Jesus and all believers sitting on the Father's throne. These are to be viewed as spiritual realities.
Your response makes a lot of sense to me.
My one point, and I may be way off on this, but when we read about the heavenly Jerusalem descending to earth, it is symbolic, not a literal building or physical city. It represents something heavenly coming to earth.
In my understanding, it represents the antitype of the OT temple, which was a type of what was heavenly as it says in Ex. that the earthly temple is made after the pattern in heaven shown to Moses ( Exodus 25-27).
This heavenly antitype, the true reality, is what descends to the New Earth from the New Heaven. It is God's heavenly throne (power, authority, dominion) come to earth in the heavenly New Jerusalem. The New Jerusalem is the Body of Christ in which God dwells eternally. There is no need for a physical temple in the New Jerusalem because the Lord Almighty and the Lamb (Jesus) are the temple whom forever indwells the Church, the Body of Christ, which the New Jerusalem description symbolizes, representing and intimate (as in a bride and bridegroom who become one in marriage), unmediated, direct and eternal relationship of believers with God. Rev. 21:21-22 speaks of this symbolism, with the glory of the God being the eternal light of the New Jerusalem and the Lamb (Jesus) is the lamp, so no sun is needed and there is no night in this realm because it is the kingdom of light without darkness, that is pure, holy, and sinless.
In Rev. 3 the term temple is used as a metaphor the the body of Christ with believers being called pillars and other parts of the temple as if they are physically built into a physical temple, just as Paul says that believers are living stones being built into a temple of God with Jesus being the chief cornerstone, the stone that the builders (Ethnic Israel who built the physical 1st and 2nd temple which was expanded, embellished, and made magnificent by Herod) rejected. The Jews rejected Jesus the foundational element Scripture speaks of throughout. See pt. 2
Let us not spiritualiseceverything or turn into metaphors that are not .
It is a heavenly or spiritual city coming down to an earthly one.
God is Spirit yet has more substance than any chair yiu maybe sitting on .
The visions of Ezekiel and Daniel were not ethereal somethings .
They saw a reality that was very difficult to put into words and many things were " like unto" others were clear and specific .
Our minds need to be sanctified and renewed by the Word of God and we should tread softly not jumping to conclusions .
As we get nearer to the time appointed we will if prayerful get the understanding .
Step by step .
The figurative language of this chapter and the apocalyptic nature of the book of Revelation lends toward taking this topic in a figurative sense as representing something very real, substantive, yet spiritual, the body of Christ as the tabernacle in which God dwells forever with the redeemed is quite applicable to this New Jerusalem.
Therefore, although you seem to have a negative view of such things as typology, metaphors, figures, and such, I think it makes the most sense that the New Jerusalem is not an physical city, but demonstrates the state of our eternal union with God.
If you can tell me how apostles can actually be physical pillars and foundations and stones of this city, and how Jesus can actually be a cornerstone, or a body made up of millions of physical individuals then that is another matter, but as it seems to me that such identification is actually figuratively written to reveal realities we just do not yet truly know at this time because we are of the earth now and the New Jerusalem is a heavenly and spiritual reality just as real a physical city.
And what is it meant by Heavenly Jerusalem? Rev 21:1-2, "1And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."
The new Jerusalem is the church, the bride of Christ, the Body of Christ. Are the saints of the OT included in the Bride? Yes we both are fellow citizens.
Hebr 11:16, "But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a CITY." This verse refers to the heros of faith before Christ.
2. Where were the souls of the OT saints were going to in the OT era? In the story of the rich man and Lazarus both the wicked and the righteous were going down to earth in a place called by the evangelists as "Hades" (in KJB is written as Hell). This term was also taken from the Septuagint who translated the Hebrew word "sheol" as "Hades", in this way showing that what was meant by Jews of that time with the word Sheol was not the grave but a place down the earth where the souls of the dead were going to.
In that place there were two compartments, one for the wicked who were tortured and one for the righteous who were comforted.
When Jesus was crucified He said to that criminal crucified next to Him who repented that he would be in Paradise with Him soon. Paul in his epistles wishes to go with Christ in heaven after dying. In Rev we see the souls of the slaughtered believers under the altar of the Temple in Heaven. Under the altar means under Jesus' sacrifice . So when Jesus was resurrected from the dead He took all the souls of the saints of the OT, and before that age such as Noah and others, into Heaven.
... see pt 4
Probably because they wanted to discriminate themselves from the Jews. Because in that early era the danger to Christianity was not due to heresies but due to Jewish traditions and oracles that some wanted to adopt into the new faith. We see in the Acts that the Jewish believers could not cut ties with the Law, so that even when Paul went to Jerusalem, James adviced him to pretend that he didn't teach the Jews abroad against the Law (which Paul was actually doing it).
To be honest I would like to know how Jesus called the gathering. Jesus was not speaking in grk but in Aramaic, So He used a specific Jewish or Aramaic word, Maybe the one used in the OT for Israel. We don't know. But the evangelists who wrote the gospels translated it in grk as church. With the word Church it is definately meant the one body of Hebrews and gentiless who believe in Christ. But not the Jews before Him in the OT. The church was formed on Pentecost so it includes people from that time till the end.
Ephesians 2:16, "And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:"
It says one body. It is the Body of Christ.
Ephesians 2:19-22,
"19Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit"
It says we have become fellow citizens. Of which state? Hebr 12:22, "But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,"
...see pt3
A lot of debate going on lately. So let me say my beliefs one by one.
Firstly my knee is getting better so I think an operation will not be needed. The doctor said that we see how it goes in the future and then we decide what to do. Nevertheless I wouldn't like to go for an operation. Ten years ago I had a similar injury in my left knee. The doctor said that it would be better to go for an operation. But a friend and brother in Christ, an ex-athlete, insisted that I wouldn't do it. Instead He said it would be a lot better to do weight lifting for my legs. I followed his advice and so after a time I was able to jump, run everything. Sometimes now and then I feel it stiff but nothing serious. I hope your problems with your shoulders go better. Let us not forget that we have a God who heals.
1. Now before talking about the church let me say a bit of information from ancient history.
Today when we say "church" we usually mean the building. This is true for the English speaking people but for modern grks too. But in ancient times church (grk ecclesia), the term meant just a congregation, nomatter if it were a religious or a political or an athletic event. The most famous "church" in anc grc was the "Ecclesia of Demus" (freely translated as "Public Congregation") in the ancient city/state of Athens. It was the gathering of all Athenian citizens at a certain place on certain dates to discuss and decide about their city's affairs. So church was any gathering actually.
When the Septuagint (who were Hebrew teachers and rabbis speaking both Hebrew and grk) translated the OT, translated the Hebrew word for congregation as "church" sometimes but some other times as "synagogue", which also means congregation in grk. The Septuagint of course did not have in mind the christian church. They meant just a gathering of Hebrews.
When the early gentile church was formed, the christians prefferd the term church than synagogue to call their congregation.
...see pt2
I the Greek the word "ecclesia" which means congregation/assembly of the called out ones. The Septuagint uses the word ecclesia.
There's a different word in the Hebrew used in the wilderness equivalent to ecclesia which means "assembly" and is derived from the root word to "gather
The word "QAHAL" means "assembly" or "congregation" and was used to refer to the community of Israel as a whole.
In Matthew 16:18 Jesus says And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
This is future! Jesus is the cornerstone, That's leveling point where the foundation depends on for accuracy!
This is the most important part of a building.
If its off the whole construction project is out of whack!
When the cornerstone is set then comes the foundation. (Apostles)
Afterwards comes the building!
This is the ecclesia! (Jews and Gentiles alike)
The wall of partition has been broken down. Ephesians 2:14.
This group of believers is under a "NEW COVENANT" that is different from the gathering in the wilderness!
When Jesus made this statement the foundation haven't been laid yet.
The cornerstone was set at Jesus crucifixion, afterwards the Holyspirit indwelling beginning with the Apostles. (Foundation)
Afterwords the Church Jesus mentioned in Matthew 16:18.
Note:
The rock is built on the statement Peter made in Matthew 16:16
"Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God"
Christ deity is pinnacle in Christianity.
Blessings.
Thanks for the reply and the Scripture verses. Appreciated.
And while you say the apostles quoted from it ,that does not mean at all they were speaking about the same tbing.
And let us face it . We have what we have for centuries and still have not exhausted it but have rather sought to have other 'versions' for it is said because " of our better understanding" but prove they have little or none and it is very doubtful if they know God at all .
The Bible is in many ways like a jigsaw puzzle . The " milk" of the Word being the sides and corners . For no matter how big the puzzle they are the easiest to find first .
Once the framework is up with its four corners . We know that everything is inside it and there is nothing outside it . I wonder if that is meant by "found wanting"? That is outside Chrsist .
But that is another matter .
The hardest parts are the sky ( heavenly) for it is so contrary to our old nature .I think .
So most if not everyone starts with the earthly things .
Me I start with lines whatever sort they are,
We get clumps of pieces which we put here and there but often find we have put them in the wrong place and need to adjust . But if we continue clumps join to clumps and perhaps long before the puzzle is finished we 'see' the picture or understand in some measure . It then can get easier and we make less mistakes .
We don't force pieces into where wet hunk they should go ,but learn to be patient .
I've been studying and thinking about the Scriptures for over 40 years ,I don't need to go anywhere else or find another version to make it easier . If I go to university it does not conform to me but seeks to bring me up to them.
They don't bring the language down to my level but seek to bring mine up to it.
And if things are " sometimes hard to understand" ( said Peter) what of it?
The Apostles did quote from the Septuagint being written in the Greek that was the common language at the time and also a more precise language that Hebrew or our English. These godly men inspired by the Holy Spirit to use the Septuagint (even though Paul knew Hebrew. There is no way or your to know if the Septuagint, written around the 3rd century B.C. was corrupted, but the Holy Spirit inspired apostles to use it, so He must have approved it for use by the Scripture writes.
I disagree with you completely about ANY extra books and given the p,et Nora of ' versions' of the Bible today that are plainly wrong despite their boasts their " better understanding" rhey should all be thrown away . As for those 'traditionally ' added to the cannon of scripture I hold them false as well despite what you have said and are mistaken in their validity .
The KJV authorised I've never found wanting unreliable or untruthful . After 40 years of study and thought it is still inexhaustible .
I neither need to go elsewhere or recommend anyone else to do so ,it's a path that will lead to trouble and mischief. I'm not clever enough to play cards with the devil or be in such foolish debates .
We are living in the end times and while many claim holy inspiration none show it . So I decline to go down " by pass meadow '.
People have enough trouble understanding the cannon of scripture you wouod seem to want to add to their troubles .
I will not .
GB
As you know, Hebrews chapter 11 is the classic example of the few folk mentioned whom God accepted, by their faith, not having received the promise (of the coming Deliverer, Debt-payer and the hope of eternal life). And in closing that chapter, the writer declares, "And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect."
Not having received the promise as yet, the OT saints waited in faith, in a faithful God. God having accepted them by their faith & patient waiting, yet their perfection was still to be realized through the merits of the Cross, the New Covenant in Christ's Blood, and the ultimate fulfilling of God's Promises to Abraham. And that same faith in a loving God is what we express today; so together, they, with us, can now enjoy both spiritual and eternal perfection through the Son of God. Without Jesus, any faith or hope we exhibit would all be vanity, but in Christ we have "an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast", Who keeps and sustains the saints of old and us today securely and eternally. GBU.
There's those in the OT that passed on that is not considered part of the new covenant and is not part of Christ Church.
They were saved by faith but under the old covenant and rituals that pointed to their Messiah's finish work on the cross freeing them from the bondage that held them captive.
The difference between Israel and the rest of the world was that they were heirs of the land, Davidic and Kingdom promises to Abraham.
(Not to be mistaken for the recipient of the promises shown mentioned in Galatians 3:29 referring to Christ.)
However we all should know there's no entering into the presence of God without the door. John 10:9. That goes for all ages.
These specific promises is after the Gathering of the Gentiles into the body of Christ. "The Church" as shown in Acts 15:14-16
"Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.
And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,
"AFTER THIS" I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:
The old testament prophets prophesied about the gather of Israel, (Post Church) and the Davidic Kingdom.
References-
Romans 11:25-26.
Romans 9:25-26 echoing Hosea 2:23.
Isaiah 40:9
Joel 2:3-32.
Isaiah 11:11-12.
The Lord calls Zion(Israel) his people several times in these verses.
..2:18 Then will the LORD be jealous for his land, and pity HIS PEOPLE.
In Isaiah 11:11 the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people.
This is not the Church but a people and elect of God for the purpose of God!
Blessings Brother!
Did not Paul say to Timothy " you have the s ruptures that are able to make you wise unto salvation"?Given that the New Testament scriptures were not yet written or collated he was speaking primarily of the Old Testament .
Thus we can see the way of salvation first laid out in the garden of Eden when God spoke of the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent the enmity between them and that there would come one ( "it") born of a woman ( a man) but not of Adams seed ( the seed of the woman) who would bruise the serpents head ( fatal) and in the doing have his heel bruised .
Abel thus conformed to way of God ,Cain did not .thus we have THE faith once and for all delivered to the saints" and the vain hope ( not faith) of false religions of works ( by the sweat of the brow").
Shouid we consider that the children of Isreal knew Gods works but Moses knew His ways"The whole world knows Gods works but how many know His ways?
"God knoweth the way of the righteous .( He has walked it before us all ). But the way of the wicked perishes".
The new Jerusalem is I believe more than' a symbol' But a physical reality for God has more 'substance' than any chair we might be sitting on . Though as you said the Union of both Jewish and Gentile believers into one body will be the most wonderful fulfilment of the ages and in the new heaven and earth "God will fill all in all".
Love what you have written here!
I recall how Jesus spoke to the teachers of the Torah saying that they diligently search it, but fail to realize that it was written about Jesus from start to finish. Having such a Christocentric view of the Scriptures and building one's hermeneutic and theology upon this focus seems to me to be the key to understanding all Scripture. When Jesus finally was incarnated in the "Last days" He ushered in a new way for not only the Jews for all who were, are, and will be reached with the Jesus' one gospel and believe that He is the one and only promised Messiah and Savior for all who put their trust in Him because He lived a perfect life, died a sacrificial death to forgive and destroy sin in those who believe on Him, and resurrected from the dead victoriously, and ascended to the right hand of the Father to rule and reign forever because He received all power and authority from the Father to do so.
This Christocentric view of Scriptures I have always held to throughout my life. Up until just the past few years, all I read was the Scriptures always knowing that Scriptures point to Jesus and so we should be looking for how Christ and His work of redemption for us is revealed and emphasized. He truly is worthy of all of our diligence in seeking to gain understanding of Scripture.
It is late here. I just got up to have a midnight snack. Glad I checked in here. Your thoughts align with my thoughts earlier this evening on Jesus being the center of all that God does in creation, time, space, and history.
They were diligent in their religious studies, whether in search of the Scriptures that gave them assurance of eternal life, or by doing so, God would have approved & rewarded their hunger to be with Him. But they missed the central thread running throughout the Word about the Giver of salvation and eternal life. Had they searched diligently for the Messiah, alert to the many prophecies about Him and His Coming, they might have learned that the eternal life they searched for was in their Messiah's possession, ready to impart it.
And in despair (as I read it), Jesus spoke to them, "And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life" ( John 5:40). He was right there with them, the fulfilment of the prophecies about Him, and they still refused to believe in Him, thus forgoing the eternal life they longed for. Reminds me of the times when an answer to a problem stares me in the face, but I just don't see it. Though fortunately for some of them, their blinders were lifted off as the penny dropped, embracing the promised Messiah, the Son of God. Thanks for your added thoughts Gigi on what should be our Christocentric understanding of the whole Word of God.
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Posting comments is currently unavailable due to high demand on the server.
Please check back in an hour or more. Thank you for your patience!
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?