Christians are not under the New Covenant

Bruce Atkinson said:

'after those days'. That phrase is used to indicate AFTER Jesus returns to earth and sets up His Kingdom ON EARTH.

Click to expand...

"AFTER THOSE DAYS"


It was Abraham's "circumcision of the heart" of which justification took place long before he was circumcised so that he couldn't depend on the rite of circumcision to save him. The 'sign of circumcision' was given to Abraham as 'a seal' (or token) of the (justifying) righteousness which he had before he was circumcised. This God did in order that Abraham might become the father of every believer in all ages. Abraham was to be the model man of justification by faith whether they be Jew or Gentile, who should thereafter obtain life everlasting at the end of the ages.

In Jeremiah's "after those days", it most definitely is referring to the fulfillment on the Day of Pentecost as I said previously about the "tribal leaders" being present at that major event..


The Old Testament promises were mainly of earthly, the New Testament promises, of heavenly blessings: the exact fulfillment of the earthly promises was a pledge of the fulfillment of the heavenly.


Here the term "the days will come" [a future time] mean the same as "after those days" because the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost occurred AFTER the ascension of Christ.


This is another confirmation that Jeremiah's prophecy did happen in the NT as foretold.


A similar phrase like "after those days" is used in several different ways in reference to his second coming at the end of the ages:

Moriah's Song said:

"AFTER THOSE DAYS"

Deuteronomy 30:6 "And the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring,
so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live."​

It was Abraham's "circumcision of the heart" of which justification took place long before he was circumcised so that he couldn't depend on the rite of circumcision to save him. The 'sign of circumcision' was given to Abraham as 'a seal' (or token) of the (justifying) righteousness which he had before he was circumcised. This God did in order that Abraham might become the father of every believer in all ages. Abraham was to be the model man of justification by faith whether they be Jew or Gentile, who should thereafter obtain life everlasting at the end of the ages.

In Jeremiah's "after those days", it most definitely is referring to the fulfillment on the Day of Pentecost as I said previously about the "tribal leaders" being present at that major event..

Jer 31:33 - But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.​

The Old Testament promises were mainly of earthly, the New Testament promises, of heavenly blessings: the exact fulfillment of the earthly promises was a pledge of the fulfillment of the heavenly.

Heb 8:10 - This IS the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. (Note the present tense "Is" --- and therefore confirmation the New Covenant is a "now and evelasting" covenant.)​

Here the term "the days will come" [a future time] mean the same as "after those days" because the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost occurred AFTER the ascension of Christ.

Heb 8:7,8 - For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second [covenants]. For he finds fault with them when he says: "The days will come, says the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah;​

This is another confirmation that Jeremiah's prophecy did happen in the NT as foretold.

Heb 10:16 - "This is the covenant that I will make with them "after those days," says the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds,"​

A similar phrase like "after those days" is used in several different ways in reference to his second coming at the end of the ages:

Mat 24:29 - "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken;​

Mar 13:24 - "But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light,​

Click to expand...

In the new covenant it’s faith and baptism Mk 16:16 acts 8:36-38 acts 2:39-39 this promise vs 39 refers to ez 36:25-27

It would also seem that multiple respondents in this thread take a verse or two out of context and then misinterpret it. Specifically, the phrase 'after those days' is the source of much contention in this thread.

In particular, that phrase demands that one determine: after WHAT days? Of the 5 uses of that phrase in the KJV, 2 of them clearly refer to short periods of time: 1) after Zacharias became speechless and Elisabeth conceived in Luke 1; and 2) Pauls' trip to Jerusalem in Acts 21.

The other three uses of 'after those days' are in or quoting the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34. In this case, figuring out WHAT days requires comparing scripture with scripture to get 'the rest of the story'. Jeremiah 31 and Hebrews 8 don't seem to readily clarify the timing in preceding or following verses, but Hebrews 10 makes it abundantly clear:

Hebrews 10:12-18 (KJV)
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,
16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

The 'timing' of 'those days' is clarified in verses 12-13, a direct reference to Psalm 110:1-2
1 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
2 The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. (KJV)

The 'until' in Psalm 110:1 clearly points to Armageddon. The world still wants to see Israel destroyed.

Some may try to show that verses 14-15 above indicates that the New Covenant went into effect at Pentecost. It seems to me that 14-15 is simply pointing to Jesus, but NOT that He put the New Covenant into effect. Had He done so, Jesus would have stated such during his earthly ministry!

Also, the claim that the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-34 came to pass at Pentecost (~30 AD) cannot be true because if it had, then Paul would never have written the book of Hebrews roughly 20 years later and quoted Jeremiah 31:31-34! He wrote to the Hebrews (Israel) that did NOT consider Jesus is their Messiah they crucified! (They still don't)

It's my opinion that 'after those days' is a reference to the time following (after) the 'last days', which always refers to the 7 years tribulation and Jesus' 2nd coming afterwards. Here's a couple examples:

Isaiah 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. (KJV)
Micah 4:1 But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it. (KJV)
Acts 2:16-17 (KJV)
16 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel;
17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:
2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. (KJV)
(The destruction of the Temple in 70 AD and dispersal of Israel was just a preview of the coming 7 year tribulation!)

Has ANY of that happened yet?

Have the Jewish people stopped teaching their children of their heritage, belief, and the Law? Has 'my laws' been put in the hearts and minds of all Israel? Hardly. Why not? Paul explained it quite well:

Romans 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. (KJV) (underlining mine)

Clearly, the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31 and repeated in Hebrews has NOT happened, has it?

Regarding Gentiles in the bloodline of Jesus, compare the wording in Matthew with that of Luke -

Matthew 1:5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; (KJV)
Luke 3:32 Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson, (KJV)

Like all royalty, bloodline (genealogy) is always that of the father, never the mother. Of note is that the genealogy of Joseph in Luke shows only the men, proving that Jesus is a Jew to all, although we know that God the Father is Jesus' true Father.

Bruce Atkinson said:

Of note, it was written TO HEBREWS, eg, Israel, sometime after 50 AD according to most Bible scholars.

Click to expand...

Please clarify that for me as there can only be two options as I see it.

Do you believe the Book of Hebrews was:

Thanks.

Moriah's Song said:

Please clarify that for me as their can only be two options as I see it.

Do you believe the Book of Hebrews was:

1- written to Hebrews who accepted Christ as their Savior?

or​

2- written to Hebrews who had never received Christ as their Savior?​

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Some may have differing opinions, but the church (Ekklesia in Greek = called out assembly) was Jews only (OK, maybe a gentile here and there) until Paul had spent 3 years with Jesus in the desert and Jesus provided the mystery of salvation by faith alone. Time wise, at least in my opinion, that didn't happen until Acts 14 or 15, eg, about 45 AD or later.

Remembering Peter's statement of belief that Jesus was the Christ in Matthew 16:16 was only his belief in Jesus. Nothing about His death on the cross for our sin, burial and resurrection on the 3rd day according to scripture as declared by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. So at Pentecost, it was all Jews present (and perhaps some Gentiles) that were filled with the Spirit, that, like Peter, showed them that Jesus was, indeed, the Christ. Period.

So why would Paul write to saved Hebrews? He didn't. Throughout Hebrews, Paul writes of a 'better' things than the Mosaic Law, that all Jews (even Jesus) followed and obeyed faithfully. In particular, Paul writes of a better hope, better testament, better covenant (referring to the New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31-34), better sacrifice, etc. Of course, he was talking of Jesus' death on the cross for all sin vs the animal sacrifices for sin per the Law. Paul also disparaged the Law multiple times in Hebrews as well and proving that Jesus' death was the better sacrifice once and for all.

Of note throughout all of Pauls' writings is that he as well as the writers of the general epistles all expected that Jesus would soon return (7-10 years from then?) and set up His Kingdom. The disciples expected His imminent return and even asked him 'when' in Acts 1:6 just before His ascension. So it's reasonable to believe that Pauls' reference to the New Covenant would be fulfilled for the Jews very soon for all. Nowhere in the Old Testament nor even the New Testament does it indicate a 2000 year 'pause' until the fullness of the Gentiles has been achieved.

Bruce Atkinson said:

So why would Paul write to saved Hebrews? He didn't.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your response to my questions.

Based on your answer I did some research on the Bibles we have in our home library that has the "Introduction" to the Book of Hebrews and this below is just one Bible that I chose only for the reason that it is a Bible that was written for Jewish Christians with the assistance of at least one Rabbi.

I have 5 other bible version Introductions that essentially say the same thing as the 'Introduction" to the Book of Hebrews bible does. Therefore, I have quoted what their Introduction says instead of the others which are: RSV, CSB, NASB, and the NKJV.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The 'Letter to the Hebrews' - though the title is not original to the book - is written to Jewish believers in "Yeshua" of the first century, as we can tell from the content. At one time the author, who is not named was thought to be Paul; but scholars today agree that the author is unknown. Whoever he is, he is thoroughly skilled in his handling of the Greek language, the Septuagint, and Jewish thought - particularly with reference to the Temple service. The date, though not firmly known, appears to be before 70 CE. We can conclude this from remarks that the Old Covenant is "close to vanishing" (8;13) and the question "Would they not have ceased to be offered?" (10:2), which suggest that the Temple sacrificial system was still operative.

More important than the author or date is the situation of the Jewish believers being addressed. Despite their maturity and sophistication, some were on the road to abandoning their faith altogether and returning to Judaism minus "Yeshua." They were being treated as outsiders or even traitors to the Jewish people (13:13) and undergoing trials and persecution (12:3,7) -- though apparently no one had yet become a martyr (12:4). Others were following strange teachings (13:9) and had even stopped meeting with other believers for worship (10:25). But returning to traditional Judaism would also mean laying aside the faith that Yeshua had opened a way into the heavenly sanctuary, allowing for direct access to God and face-to-face prayer (10:19-22).

The author of Hebrews is quite concerned for the faith of these Jewish followers of "Yeshua." Much of the letter is given to showing that "Yeshua", the incarnate God of Israel Himself, is greater than anyone else -- greater than the angels, greater than Moses, the bringer of a greater covenant with greater priesthood than before and a greater sacrifice that fully atones for our sins. Since this is true, abandoning "Yeshua" is equivalent to turning away from the God of Israel. Along with the emphasis on "Yeshua" come several passages, illustrated from the 'Tanakh," warning that turning from trust in "Yeshua" will bring consequences. But the author wanted to encourage, not scold. He points in chapter 11 to a "hall of fame" of Jewish heroes who followed God in spite of obstacles and even persecution, setting an example for us today. To those who persevere, a Sabbath-rest with the Lord is promised (4:8). And how does perseverance come? By "focusing on Yeshua, the initiator and perfecter of faith" (12:2). Amen!

*by the Messianic Jewish Project - 2011 - It is a NT Messianic bible that is written primarily for Jewish Christians.

Perhaps no book of the Bible authorship is more disputed among theologians than that of Hebrews.

The quoted introduction indicating that the author is unknown is astounding. Perhaps claiming it to have been written by 'unknown' is a subtle means to discredit Paul's epistles written by revelation directly from Jesus while in Arabia. No other writer in the Bible repeatedly writes about the blood of Christ as the atonement for all our sin as does Paul. Some may think that Peter wrote Hebrews, but even at the end of his life, Peter didn't fully comprehend what Paul was teaching, even after a the Jerusalem council in Acts 15/Galatians 2, as he wrote:

2 Peter 3:15-16 (KJV)
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Further, there is so much of Pauls' revelation in there referring to the blood of Christ being the atonement for all sin makes it clear to most that Paul is the author. Look at Hebrews 9 where Paul first shows the 'old' way of animal sacrifice in the Holy of Holies in the Temple once per year -

Hebrews 9:6-7 (KJV)
6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:

And then compare that to Christ being the once and for all perfect Lamb without blemish sacrificed for sin -

Hebrews 9:11-14 (KJV)
11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Remember, too, that Saul(Paul) was a Pharisee which is the 'ultra orthodox' Jews of the day and as such, was highly educated and thus very fluent in Greek as well as Hebrew. He was likely educated in a Jewish academy of the day and thus thoroughly versed in all facets of the Old Testament. He also wrote his epistles in Greek. After Sauls' experience on the road to Damascus, he immediately switched from persecuting Jewish believers to going to their synagogues proclaiming Jesus IS the promised Messiah!

Additionally, I disagree with the statement in the introduction that it was written to Jewish believers. Perhaps the biggest reason I feel it was written to unbelieving Jews is chapter 11...the faith chapter. If it had been written to Jewish believers, they already had faith that Jesus was the Messiah. So why would chapter 11 be necessary?

Yes, chapter 11 stressed faith without works of the law, which, perhaps, Jewish believers still followed. But faith without works of the law is the basis of all of Pauls' writings, as clearly stated in Ephesians -

Ephesians 2:8-9 (KJV)
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

It's not necessary that we 'convince' each other or other readers of this thread of the authorship or 'audience' of Hebrews. There are factions on both sides of the discussion. In the end, does it make a difference?

Bruce Atkinson said:

The quoted introduction indicating that the author is unknown is astounding.

Perhaps claiming it to have been written by 'unknown' is a subtle means to discredit Paul's epistles written by revelation directly from Jesus while in Arabia.

Click to expand...

Bruce, I quoted the line that said that "At one time the author, who is not named, was thought to be Paul; but scholars today agree that the author is unknown" from the Jewish/Christian oriented 'Tree of Life" Bible because of who the audience was that the Bible was written to.

But I also added that my other 5 Bibles also essentially said the same... that Paul was thought to be the author but that there was also enough evidence that the author was unknown. As you said, "the author is not essential - the audience is."

Yet, I don't believe there was a 5 Bible scholar conspiracy to discredit Paul from being the author due to the fact that all 5 Bibles said about the same thing..."it can't be positivie enough to indicate exactly who wrote it."

So let's move on from that. You either accept the scholars introduction or not. No one is forcing you to believe it. Do you have valid scholarship credentials that you can give that warrant confirmation that Paul is no doubt the writer of the Hebrews?

Bruce Atkinson said:

Perhaps claiming it to have been written by 'unknown' is a subtle means to discredit Paul's epistles...

Click to expand...

I don't believe that the 70 divinely inspired Septuagint translators of the Greek language conspired to discredit Paul's epistles at all. That is an opinion that has no foundation to it.

As far as the author of Galatians goes, it was definitely written by Paul and as far as I know, no one disputes any of his writing except for the possibility of the book of Hebrews.

The dates for Galatians in my RSV give A.D. 49, either before or after the Jerusalem Council, or a few years later than A.D. 49. An even later date gives it at about the same time Paul wrote to Corinth and Rome, A.D. 55-56.

Bruce Atkinson said:

...written by revelation directly from Jesus while in Arabia.

Click to expand...

As far as Paul's epistles being "written by revelation directly from Jesus while in Arabia" goes, that can't be possible at all because...


It is here, around 37 A.D., that it seems that he went to Arabia because Paul was first in Damascus and then onto Arabia and "after many days" went to Jerusalem (Acts 9, then Gal. 1:17-18)


Therefore, as the text says, Paul left Damascus, went to Arabia, went back to Damascus, and then to Jerusalem.

Christ was crucified in 33 A.D. Paul was converted in 34 A.D., spent 3 years in Damascus, then went to Arabia and back to Damascus that would mean that Paul did not even go to Galatia until 9-10 years after leaving Damascus to go to Jerusalem.

What Paul did in Arabia, he does not say. But because of his proclaiming the gospel while in Damascus, we can be sure that Paul did not go to Arabia on vacation! It is very likely that Paul needed that amount of time to sort out all those previous events that occurred at the time of the cross and his role in this New Covenant that replaced, or enhanced, the Old Covenants. More than likely he was studying the Torah, praying and witnessing to anyone that would listen. Perhaps you could call it "attending seminary in the deserts of Arabia." Whatever he was doing, I think we can both agree that "he was now doing it for the Lord."

Moriah's Song said:

Christ was crucified in 33 A.D. Paul was converted in 34 A.D

Click to expand...

Makes Perfect sense, since it seems the parable of fig tree in Luke 13:6-7
was fulfilled "when Israel fell, And then God Saved Paul By PURE GRACE,"
To "go to the Gentiles." Correct?

Moriah's Song said:

More than likely he was studying the Torah, praying and witnessing to anyone that would listen. Perhaps you could call it "attending seminary in the deserts of Arabia."

Click to expand...

This would not be the time that Paul Received From The Risen And Glorified
LORD, From Heaven, "The Revelation of The MYSTERY," For us, Today,
would it? Finally finishing with 2 Timothy in about 66-67 Ad?

Did he partially have This MYSTERY Revelation, by this time?:

Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that The Word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put IT from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

Could he possibly have had Most of The Revelation of The MYSTERY, by this time?:

Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that The word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put IT from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

Is this MYSTERY, Under PURE GRACE, Directly TO us, today, and should it
not be Rightly Divided From God's prophetic program to Israel? ie:

(2 Timothy 2:15; Romans 16:25; Ephesians 3:9 = Grace/Mystery fellowship {Romans - Philemon}, For ALL “to SEE,” today,?)

Please Be Richly Encouraged, Enlightened, Exhorted, and Edified!

Moriah's Song said:

All "study Bibles" with notes at the bottom are written by people who wish to promote a specific "doctrine" such as is in the Darby Bible. That KJV Bible is published with notes that John Nelson Darby alone used to promote his "theory of Dispensationalism". He was not a theologian nor an ordained minister. He never went to seminary. It was his own interpretation that was developed in the early 1800's and promoted extensively in England, Scotland and the USA.

Prior to the 1800's the amillennial view of escatology, along with premillennialism, are two of the oldest in church history, being held since the first century up until the early 1800's. But the premillennial view of today is not the same premillennial thoughts of the first century. The premillennialism of today is closer to "dispensationalism" than it was in the early church of the first century.

This is why so many people have been mislead through "notes" that are there to indoctrinate the reader to the writer's thoughts about a certain "theory". This is where many unlearned people place their trust in what "a person's interpretation" of what scripture says instead of trusting in scripture alone.

For an exmple, my RSV bible on 1 Thess 4:15 it's notes at the bottom says "Some interpreters have seen in this account evidence for the removal of the church [rapture] for a period of time [1000 years] prior to the Second Advent. Both the pe-tribulationalists and the mid-tribulationalists so hold."

[Note: those are not the apostle Paul's notes, they are "a person's thoughts" only! They are not divinely "inspired" writings any more than a Bible Dictionary or a commentator's comments are inspired as they all have some error's that must be detected before trusting in what you are reading. All pastors have libraries and used them extensively but even they can be mislead if having gone through such semanries as the Dallas Theoligical Seminary in Dallas Texas USA.

However, when letting scripture alone in verses 15 and 17 of 1 Thess above is used to determine what is meant, the verses read this way: "For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep....then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord." This all happens at the same time on the Last Day, at the end of the world, if you let scripture alone develop what is written by the apostle Paul.

If Christ should return today we would then join them on both our journies together to heaven (as in Elijah's translation) and just as those in Matthew 27:52-53 arose from their graves and entered the "holy city" --- paradise.

Click to expand...

Imho J N Darby helped a whole lot more people with their Bible study than not a few ordained men with letters after their names....

farouk said:

Imho J N Darby helped a whole lot more people with their Bible study than not a few ordained men with letters after their names....

Click to expand...

How is helping a whole lot of people with his Bible Study notes if his notes are not Biblicaly sound? Example: Not one person can find a verse in the New Testament that clearly says the "sacrifices will be reinstated" nor a direct "mandate from God to build Him a fourth temple" when scripture says...



Lastly from the mouth of Jesus Himself he says this to the Samaritan woman at the well...


People are being mislead; not lead by Darby's Schofield Bible Notes. Therefore, I will stick with the words of Jesus, the apostles and the other writers of scripture.

Moriah's Song said:

How is helping a whole lot of people with his Bible Study notes if his notes are not Biblicaly sound? Example: Not one person can find a verse in the New Testament that clearly says the "sacrifices will be reinstated" nor a direct "mandate from God to build Him a fourth temple when scripture says...

Heb 9:24-28 - For Christ has entered, not into a sanctuary made with hands, a copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the Holy Place yearly with blood not his own; for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.​

Act 17:24-25 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all men life and breath and everything.

Heb 7:27 - He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did this once for all when he offered up himself.​

Lastly from the mouth of Jesus Himself he says this to the Samaritan woman at the well...

John 4:20-24...Our fathers worshiped on this mountain; and you say that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship." Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. ...But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."​

People are being mislead; not lead by Darby's Schofield Bible Notes. Therefore, I will stick with the words of Jesus, the apostles and the other writers of scripture.

Click to expand...

One could ask, What is Ezekiel referring to?

It helps if we distinguish Jews, Gentiles and the church of God (1 Corinthians 10.32).

Darby never suggested that the finished work of Christ would be supposedly replaced by atoning sacrifices. Luke 22 shows that the passover looked forward to that finished work, the Lord's Supper looks back, and after the church - the heavenly people - has gone, those on earth that will believe will look back also.

farouk said:

Imho J N Darby helped a whole lot more people with their Bible study than not a few ordained men with letters after their names

Click to expand...

But Darby never attended a seminary or any other Bible College.

Yet I see you totally avoided my post altogether.

Moriah's Song said:

But Darby never attended a seminary or any other Bible College.

Yet I see you totally avoided my post altogether.

Click to expand...

I don't believe in an an apostolic succession of seminaries or Bible colleges.

As Robert Murray M'Cheyne said: "It is God's Word, and not man's comment upon God's Word, which saves souls."

But I think our respective thinking is evidently so vastly different that profit may cease from discussing this subject.

farouk said:

But I think our respective thinking is evidently so vastly different that profit may cease from discussing this subject.

Click to expand...

I didn't think you would have a good answer to Jesus' words...but that is your choice. I choose not to be indoctrinated into a false system of man's own imagination.

Moriah's Song said:

I didn't think you would have a good answer to Jesus' words...but that is your choice. I choose not to be indoctrinated into a false system of man's own imagination.

Click to expand...

Let's not get into ad hominem; whether or not you agree, you will be aware that those of a dispensational outlook can give plenty of Scripture for their convictions.

No one but apostles have authority from Christ
All are sects with false doctrine
The tradition of men

farouk said:

Imho J N Darby helped a whole lot more people with their Bible study than not a few ordained men with letters after their names....

Click to expand...

How is helping a whole lot of people with [edited - added: Scofield's] Bible Study notes if his notes are not Biblicaly sound? Example: Not one person can find a verse in the New Testament that clearly says the "sacrifices will be reinstated" nor a direct "mandate from God to build Him a fourth temple when scripture says...


Act 17:24-25 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all men life and breath and everything.

Heb 7:27 - He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did this once for all when he offered up himself.

Moriah's Song said:

How is helping a whole lot of people with his Bible Study notes if his notes are not Biblicaly sound? Example: Not one person can find a verse in the New Testament that clearly says the "sacrifices will be reinstated" nor a direct "mandate from God to build Him a fourth temple when scripture says...

Heb 9:24-28 - For Christ has entered, not into a sanctuary made with hands, a copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf. Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the Holy Place yearly with blood not his own; for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.​

Act 17:24-25 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in shrines made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all men life and breath and everything.

Heb 7:27 - He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did this once for all when he offered up himself.

Click to expand...

This is about our Great High Priest in heaven, as verse 24 says.

The OT sacrifices were not in heaven.

Nor is the Lord's Supper, which is 'till He come' (1 Corinthians 11.26).

After the Rapture of the church, any pilgrim saints not in heaven yet will look back to the Cross.

It is admittedly hard for those who simply do not distinguish between Jews and the church of God (1 Corinthians 10.32) to see this.