When was the End of the Old Covenant and the Beginning of the New Covenant?

[Dizerner]

No Thank you. I have my Jewish Didache, which is the 12 Messianic Apostles /disciples instructions to the Gentiles in the early Church.
Shalom

Choosing an uninspired apocryphal work over the inspired canon does not seem like a regenerate choice.

 

[David Koberstein]

Choosing an uninspired apocryphal work over the inspired canon does not seem like a regenerate choice.

You would be surprised how close the Jewish Didache came to being canonical. It's basically a early Messianic church manual from the Messianic Apostles of the B'rit Hadashah to the Gentiles. It might behoove you to read it. You might learn something. Then again maybe not.
Shalom

 

[Dizerner]

You would be surprised how close the Jewish Didache came to being canonical. It's basically a early Messianic church manual from the Messianic Apostles of the B'rit Hadashah to the Gentiles. It might behoove you to read it. You might learn something. Then again maybe not.
Shalom

Arrogant of you to presume I haven't read it... multiple times. But typical.

It's not canonical, and Eusebius says it's spurious. If you even know who he is.

We have an inspired canon, the rule and guide of faith.

To the Law and to the Testimony!

 

[David Koberstein]

Arrogant of you to presume I haven't read it... multiple times. But typical.

It's not canonical, and Eusebius says it's spurious. If you even know who he is.

We have an inspired canon, the rule and guide of faith.

To the Law and to the Testimony!

Eusebius writings have been called into question just like yours. I guess that apple didn't fall to far from that tree.
I will always keep and study the Jewish Didache. It's a good companion to my Jewish Bible.
Shalom

 

[Dizerner]

Eusebius writings have been called into question just like yours. I guess that apple didn't fall to far from that tree.
I will always keep and study the Jewish Didache. It's a good companion to my Jewish Bible.
Shalom

cool story bro

"Called into question," lol, there is no text anywhere that someone hasn't, including the Bible, or we might say, especially the Bible.

 

[David Koberstein]

cool story bro

"Called into question," lol, there is no text anywhere that someone hasn't, including the Bible, or we might say, especially the Bible.

Unless your Jewish ; your not my bro
Shalom

cool story bro

"Called into question," lol, there is no text anywhere that someone hasn't, including the Bible, or we might say, especially the Bible.

 

[David Koberstein]

cool story bro

"Called into question," lol, there is no text anywhere that someone hasn't, including the Bible, or we might say, especially the Bible.

Stock Markets are closed today for Carters damn funeral. Grrrr
Shalom

 

[jeremiah1five]

The Old Covenant (Mosaic Covenant) never ended. It merely took on a different dynamic being fulfilled by Jesus the Christ when Jesus the Christ resurrected.
Forty days later He ascended and ten days after that the New Covenant began with the personal salvation of three thousand Jews on the day of the Feast of Harvest (Pentecost - circa AD 32.)
Every day after that thousands of Jews every day came to a saving knowledge of their Messiah, Lord, and King, Jesus the Christ. It says in Scripture that Jews that became born-again remained faithful and obedient to the Law of Moses. Actually, because of what Jesus did in fulfilling every jot and tittle of the Law while on earth their being born-again was proof of their justification before God and began their sanctification in the Lord.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Formally, the end of the Old Covenant and the start of the New Covenant is in Jesus: his life, teachings and sacrifice on the cross.
Let's remember that God used the concept of "covenants" as a frame, a model, a tool, for the interactions between God and people.

In reality, God and humans cannot sit on the same table to negotiate the terms of an agreement ("covenant").
God's wisdom, mercy, justice and might are just above any covenant we humans can understand, let alone agree with.
Ants cannot make covenants with humans.

Yet, in his mercy, God teaches us about his promises and his expectations through covenants. It is an important part of his revelation.

 

[jeremiah1five]

The Cross.

In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete.
Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (Heb. 8:13 NKJ)

And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death (Heb. 9:15 NKJ)

Obsolete?

That's good to hear. Now we don't have to obey the command to not put other gods before Him.

We won't have to obey ANY command under the Law which leaves us all to lean upon our own understanding in the vanity of our minds.

Chaos and confusion come on in!

 

[jeremiah1five]

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes (Rom. 10:4 NKJ)

...food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,
which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. (Col. 2:16-17 NKJ)

Identify some of those "shadows" that are to come and tell me when they began to appear?

 

[jeremiah1five]

Yes, Jesus did complete the Law on the Cross, when he cried "It is completed/finished."

Now, your special little Jewish translations are going to downplay every Scripture that instructs on the end of the Law and Old Covenant, and I don't have much respect for that, and find it dishonest.

10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse;
for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them."
11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just shall live by faith."
12 Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them."
13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree "),
14 that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus,
that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. (Gal. 3:10-14 NKJ)

We do not want to put ourselves back under a legal system of rituals and obligations but understand the freedom of Grace.

"It is finished" does not translate to "It is abolished and obsolete."

Those are YOUR conclusions.

But by being Gentile you don't have to worry about such things since Gentiles were never under the Law to begin with.

I think it's very wrong for a Gentile who was never under the Law to tell the Jewish people who are under the Law that their Law given to them by God no longer applies to them. Such declarations only set the basis for Gentiles from the destruction of the Jewish Temple in AD 70 going forward to conduct and continue the ongoing crime of inheritance theft.

 

[jeremiah1five]

I'm no fan of King James, all he did was authorize the translation, he literally zero actual work in it. Also the NKJV is not really that slavish to the KJV, it's definitely it's own translation, and it's team is not affiliated with the original.

But this idea of lessening the "Jewishness" is just foisted by people who don't even understand what Jewishness is to begin with. It has been made into a culture and ritual and terminology that never was a part of the pure Tanach itself, it is all accretion.

I'm perfectly comfortable going to the original languages or some other translations I think are quite good.



Nomos is not Torah, I don't know where you are getting that idea from, but it's badly mistaken. Nomos is used very similarly to law in English and for secular laws or even just principles or regularities, like the law of sin or the law of death. Christians are not at all about legal systems, Christ has delivered us from the curse of the Law—all the Law does is show us we don't meet it's perfect standard and bring out our desire to break it, while puffing us up with secret pride where we think we keep it. I recommend reading through Romans 7 for a better understanding.

I'm no fan of Luther, nor does he stand for Christianity, so you are barking up the wrong tree there. ToL is an okay translation, not exceptional.

You think being "delivered from the curse of the Law" applies to Gentiles?
Gentiles have been delivered from nothing.
But by being on the outside looking in gives you what?
The right to tell the Jews they no longer have to obey the Law because according to your false Constantinian Gentile theology you give yourself the authority to say so?
Jesus Christ will return and stand alongside Israel against the "nations" in a final battle for the right to rule the world.
Do you know that on the last page of the Bible Gentiles lose?

 

[jeremiah1five]

And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. (Gal. 3:29 NKJ)

If you were honest with Scripture, you should know Saul was speaking/writing to Jews and Jewish Christians who were under a "schoolmaster" which means under the Law and Gentiles were never under a schoolmaster (the Law.)
They were never "heirs" with Isaac or Jacob according to the promise(s) given to Abram the Hebrew (Gen. 14:13) and his Hebrew seed.

 

[Dizerner]

But by being Gentile you don't have to worry about such things since Gentiles were never under the Law to begin with.

The Law condemns EVERY mouth that the WHOLE world be guilty before God.

You do not understand basic Gospel and I have already explained that.

 

[Dizerner]

Identify some of those "shadows" that are to come and tell me when they began to appear?

The shadows are past not future.

The shadows are OF THINGS TO COME.

 

[jeremiah1five]

The Law condemns EVERY mouth that the WHOLE world be guilty before God.

As a born-again Christian I am no longer under any condemnation:

1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Romans 8:1–4.

I think I understand the good news very well.
AND as a born-again Christian God has declared me "NOT GUILTY!" of transgressing any aspect of the Law. This is called "justification." God declares me "NOT GUILTY!" because of the work and obedience of Christ towards the Law. Christ's righteousness has been imputed to me and He has taken my sin nature. It is a nature-swap. I have the divine nature of Christ dwelling in me, as said by Peter:

3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
2 Peter 1:3–4.

I have escaped the corruption that is in the world - the same world many believe Jesus Christ loved and died for. But how can God and Christ love corruption? How is this reconciled with John 3:16? God so love the world of corruption?? That doesn't make any sense. Why tell us to "[believe] whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things" Philippians 4:8, if God Himself doesn't also do these things. Why the hypocrisy? The only answer is that God so loved the world of Jews that He gave His only begotten Son to them while they were in covenant with Him.

You do not understand basic Gospel and I have already explained that.

ibid.
I think you need to learn about the good news because your comment shows you don't.

 

[jeremiah1five]

The shadows are past not future.

The shadows are OF THINGS TO COME.

Double minded. Which is it? Not future, or of things to come [in the future]?