# Hebrews 3  5/21- 5/27



## hobbs27 (May 21, 2015)

3 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

2 Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house.

3 For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.

4 For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.

5 And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;

6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

7 Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice,

8 Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness:

9 When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years.

10 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways.

11 So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.)

12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.

13 But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.

14 For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;

15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.

16 For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.

17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?

18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?

19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 21, 2015)

12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.

 Divinity as the"Living God" in this context is interesting. 


By comparing Moses and 40 yrs in the desert the author seems to be saying "This IS what God is doing NOW, believe it. Don't be like the old and provocative and  ( God) tempting  rebels in the wilderness."

----------------------
 I suppose this will be of interest to some.  6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.


  My view: (The end here means the fulfillment of all the promises made by God in man's favor--promises made in answer to the prayers of men and women of faith, and promises  simply made out of  God's  loving affection for man.)


----------



## hobbs27 (May 21, 2015)

I see the last two Chapters concerning Christ' Superiority as a person, now we see His superiority as His priesthood. Going directly after Moses here which was a priest according to psalms 99:6. The author makes a distinction here between Christ and Moses. We have a distinction here between the covenant of spirit { Jesus} and the covenant of flesh { Moses} .


----------



## hobbs27 (May 21, 2015)

gordon 2 said:


> 12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
> 
> Divinity as the"Living God" in this context is interesting.
> 
> ...



What's most exciting is that you see it, right there in black and white. 



 Now my view of "the end"   The end of the old covenant. Point blank.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 21, 2015)

Just a little side note of something that literally jumped out at me his evening: 


Peter said:

2 Peter 3:3

3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

Then Jude said:

17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;

18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.

19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

Jude just as well said way back then:


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 21, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> I see the last two Chapters concerning Christ' Superiority as a person, now we see His superiority as His priesthood. Going directly after Moses here which was a priest according to psalms 99:6. The author makes a distinction here between Christ and Moses. We have a distinction here between the covenant of spirit { Jesus} and the covenant of flesh { Moses} .



Doesn't this distinction mean God changes?


----------



## hobbs27 (May 21, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Doesn't this distinction mean God changes?



God didn't change, He simply went through a divorce and remarried.

Maybe a better way of putting it, is did God change when Adam broke covenant and was cast out of the garden?


----------



## hummerpoo (May 22, 2015)

God does not divorce, he cleans the house.  Malachi 2 explains God's ways.

15. But not one has done so who has a remnant of the Spirit. And what did that one do while he was seeking a godly offspring? Take heed then to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of your youth. 16 For I hate divorce,” says the Lord, the God of Israel ...

The whole chapter must be carefully studied and the figures worked out (there are a couple that I haven't understood).

Heb. 3 is about the types and shadows of Moses' law being replaced in the revelation of the true Christ thru the incarnation.

5. Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later;


----------



## hobbs27 (May 22, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> God does not divorce, he cleans the house.



Jeremiah 3:8


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 22, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> God does not divorce, he cleans the house.  Malachi 2 explains God's ways.
> 
> 15. But not one has done so who has a remnant of the Spirit. And what did that one do while he was seeking a godly offspring? Take heed then to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of your youth. 16 For I hate divorce,” says the Lord, the God of Israel ...
> 
> ...



Were those shadows orchestrated by God for the sole purpose of showing man examples of the true Christ?
I mean they didn't just randomly happen and then man was able to use them as examples.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 22, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> God does not divorce, he cleans the house.  Malachi 2 explains God's ways.
> 
> 15. But not one has done so who has a remnant of the Spirit. And what did that one do while he was seeking a godly offspring? Take heed then to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of your youth. 16 For I hate divorce,” says the Lord, the God of Israel ...
> 
> ...



Can someone check what the greek says here? spoken later


I don't read it as meaning spoken later in every translation. For example...

Hebrews 3:5Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

5 And Moses indeed was faithful in all his house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be said:

I understand this ( in the case of Douay-Rheims) to mean that Moses was faithful in relaying to the Hebrews what God needed Moses to say to them so Moses was a faithful mediator ( served as such)  between God and His chosen people and the point  different with the new house is that it is without a mediator, because the Son is the head of the house and no mediator required.


Hebrews 3:5Wycliffe Bible (WYC)

5 And [soothly] Moses was true in all his house, as a servant, into witnessing of those things that were to be said;

I understand " that were to be said"  to mean: things that were to be said then.

Where does later come from in most modern translations?


----------



## hobbs27 (May 22, 2015)

This is from the clv:
" 5 And Moses, indeed, was faithful in His whole house as an attendant, for a testimony of that which shall be spoken."

From the Greek:

 Conj 
3475 [e] Mōusēs Μωϋσῆς Moses N-NMS 
3303 [e] men μὲν indeed Conj 
4103 [e] pistos πιστὸς [was] faithful Adj-NMS 
1722 [e] en ἐν in Prep 
3650 [e] holō ὅλῳ all Adj-DMS 
3588 [e] tō τῷ the Art-DMS 
3624 [e] oikō οἴκῳ house N-DMS 
846 [e] autou αὐτοῦ of Him, PPro-GM3S 
5613 [e] hōs ὡς as Adv 
2324 [e] therapōn θεράπων a servant, N-NMS 
1519 [e] eis εἰς for Prep 
3142 [e] martyrion μαρτύριον a testimony N-ANS 
3588 [e] tōn τῶν of the things Art-GNP 
2980 [e] lalēthēsomenōn λαληθησομένων, going to be spoken ;


----------



## hobbs27 (May 22, 2015)

Gordon...I want to and need to speak of this testimony in vs 5 but I will have to go to pm, so bare with me...maybe you can devise a way to put this out in the forum...perhaps.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 22, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> Gordon...I want to and need to speak of this testimony in vs 5 but I will have to go to pm, so bare with me...maybe you can devise a way to put this out in the forum...perhaps.



Ok, but note that "testimony" here is (depending on the translation) written as and to mean witness and not oath...or a testament or an type of things going to be spoken in the future... according to my view. But it can change....


----------



## hummerpoo (May 22, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> Jeremiah 3:8



14 ‘Return, O faithless sons,’ declares the LORD;
‘For I am a master [or husband depending on translation] to you,
And I will take you one from a city and two from a family [or tribe],
And I will bring you to Zion.’
15 “Then I will give you shepherds after My own heart, who will feed you on knowledge and understanding.

Looks like a house cleaning to me.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 22, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Were those shadows orchestrated by God for the sole purpose of showing man examples of the true Christ?
> I mean they didn't just randomly happen and then man was able to use them as examples.



Yes, but.
I can’t think of another, but “sole purpose” makes me nervous.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 22, 2015)

gordon 2 said:


> Can someone check what the greek says here? spoken later
> 
> 
> I don't read it as meaning spoken later in every translation. For example...
> ...



I don’t have anything that is a lot of help either.

KJV
for(G1519) a testimony(G3142) of those things which were to be spoken after;(G2980) 

Of my three resources only the “American Bible Polyglot” shows G3588 which is the definitive article “those” (or 62 other choices), in the KJV.  It’s pretty hard for us laymen to figure out how they get to the 12, or so, words from 3 in the KJV and others.  That happens a lot in Hebrew, not so much with Greek.

Here’s the Strong’s definition for G2980:
al-eh'-o
A prolonged form of an otherwise obsolete verb; to talk, that is, utter words: - preach, say, speak (after), talk, tell, utter. Compare G3004.
Total KJV occurrences: 295

If you want the location of the 295 times it’s used, I can post them.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 23, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> Heb. 3 is about the types and shadows of Moses' law being replaced in the revelation of the true Christ thru the incarnation.



Yesterday, I heard a preacher on the radio state that, pretty much, the whole of Hebrews was about the replacement of the Ceremonial Law by the Incarnate Christ.  I was a bit surprised by the statement, knowing a little about his theology from listening to him.

The problem is that I was working and driving between jobs.  Now, I can’t remember who it was that I heard, or even what time of day it was, so I have no way to find the sermon on the internet to investigate further the degree to which we agree on the issue, and consider his exegesis.  Once again proving that multi-tasking is a myth, at least for me.

If anyone here heard the broadcast and knows who it was I would appreciate a PM.


----------



## gordon 2 (May 23, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> I don’t have anything that is a lot of help either.
> 
> KJV
> for(G1519) a testimony(G3142) of those things which were to be spoken after;(G2980)
> ...



No...


----------



## hobbs27 (May 23, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> Yesterday, I heard a preacher on the radio state that, pretty much, the whole of Hebrews was about the replacement of the Ceremonial Law by the Incarnate Christ.  I was a bit surprised by the statement.



As we go through this letter and discuss chapter after chapter, it's full intent will become more evident to us all. My hope is we all come away knowing a little more, by learning from one another.

 I have a scriptural problem with the idea that only parts of the law have passed. Jesus made it quiet clear that not one jot nor one tittle would be removed from the law ...until.

 Has that until taken place? I profess it has. I profess the entire written law is now no longer in effect. 

 Is murder a sin? You betchya. But not because it is written on a piece of stone.

 There's no sanhedrin to confront if you break a law. The law is written on our hearts and our Lord judges us in all we do. Want to know if something is a sin? Pray, Lord Jesus, is this ok ....and await an answer.

How could just parts of the law pass without the "till" happening?


----------



## hobbs27 (May 23, 2015)

Just another thought on vs. 5

5 And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;

Apparently Paul's question here to these Jews that are tempted to drift back into Judaism is this: If Moses created things that typified Christ and His church, and if Moses prophesied of Jesus and His new way, and if Moses himself was a type of the very Jesus whom you confessed as the Christ, why are you even considering the return to Judaism? Wouldn't that be a slap in the face of Moses, much less of Christ?

About Moses, Although he was commendably faithful, Moses was merely a servant of God, not the Son of God!


----------



## hobbs27 (May 24, 2015)

15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.

16 For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.

17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?


These very people were in the 40 year period of Covenant overlap.  They were at the very end of the 40 year period as we find out later in his letter.


----------



## Day trip (May 24, 2015)

I really can't quite grasp your discussions of the "till" happening or covenant overlap, laws being replaced etc.  
I get what your saying but it just doesn't work for me.  It feels like too much of having to know exact details that don't take me beyond mere words.  No offense meant but I am going to stick to my simple minded approach that works for me.  

Chapter3
Really this is easy.  Moses was a good and worthy teacher who gave his people rules and laws that could lead them to understanding.  But Jesus came along when the laws and rules could take them no farther and showed us the Truth ie - The purpose and meaning behind the laws and rules.  Once you understand the purpose of laws and rules, you no longer need them however in following truth, you are obeying the laws, but so much more than just laws for the sake of laws.  The people who followed Moses did not trust the Truth and their unbelief kept them from entering into the new realm of simply  understanding.  "Angry God" did not punish them.  They induced their own punishment by not trusting God.   

It's like a beginning driver.  They must learn how to stay within the posted speed limit, use turn signals, pass only on dotted lines, etc.  But once one becomes a smart and experienced driver, you don't need rules.  You are going to do these things because it is safe, it is how you should drive.  Moses was the Drivers Ed. teacher, while Jesus is the expert driver who shows us the reason behind the rules (plus he created the roads and the cars, therefore he is the true authority).  Just an analogy


----------



## hummerpoo (May 24, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> As we go through this letter and discuss chapter after chapter, it's full intent will become more evident to us all. My hope is we all come away knowing a little more, by learning from one another.
> 
> I have a scriptural problem with the idea that only parts of the law have passed. Jesus made it quiet clear that not one jot nor one tittle would be removed from the law ...until.
> 
> ...



The problem is lazy talking, or typing.  It’s just so much easier than saying that it is not the Law that is replaced, but the ceremony.  The ceremony acts out the keeping of the law which is spiritual (Rm 7:14) (such things as worship, fellowship, holiness, atonement, etc.). Christ life, teaching, and death replaced the ceremony by exemplifying the law (such things as worship, fellowship, holiness, atonement, etc.).  Thus Christ is the end (goal) of the law (Rm 10:4).  The ceremony portrayed those things which the law expounds while Christ was an example of those things which the law expounds.  Thus He has a better ministry (Heb. 8:6).  We are to “continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God” (Heb. 13:15) which is spiritually equivalent to the ceremonial offering up of physical gifts.  We are to “present our bodies a living and holy sacrifice” (Rm. 12:1), a spiritual commitment not unlike the ceremonial burnt offering.  We are to “do good and share” (Heb. 13:16) a spiritual service not unlike the grain offering.

Hey, thanks for the exercise.  I just figured out the lazy way … “replacement of the Ceremony of the Law”.  It sounded better before I typed it.

We should regularly thank God for the revelation, that He gave us through Christ in the Sermon on the Mount, that His Law (murder, adultery, etc.) is so much more than words on stone or ink on paper.

If the argument were to be made that the ceremonies are the law (rather than a shadow of the spiritual law), I suppose that would constitute a partial passing of the law, and lend credibility to your argument.  However, that would be to continue the error of the Pharisees, and other lawless Jews, who viewed the law as though it spoke of earthly reward to earthly ends, or as a path to other rewards earned by men (power, position, respect, etc.).  Jesus dealings with the Pharisees very clearly showed God’s judgement of that understanding of the law, so it seems a tradition not to be emulated.  Such a continuing of the error of the Pharisees would surely ignore the warning of scripture “ Do not be carried away by varied and strange teachings; for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, through which those who were so occupied were not benefited” (Heb 13:9); in that, other scripture would unavoidable be interpreted in light of their misinterpretation; and we certainly should not use a misinterpretation of one part of scripture to interpret another part of scripture.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 24, 2015)

Day trip said:


> I really can't quite grasp your discussions of the "till" happening or covenant overlap, laws being replaced etc.
> I get what your saying but it just doesn't work for me.  It feels like too much of having to know exact details that don't take me beyond mere words.  No offense meant but I am going to stick to my simple minded approach that works for me.
> 
> Chapter3
> ...



Yep, our differences, as a friend's dad used to say, "ain't nothin' you'd stop a runnin' horse to look at".


----------



## hobbs27 (May 25, 2015)

I will leave you this to ponder on about the ceremonial law passing , then back to Hebrews.http://donkpreston.com/the-passing-of-the-law-of-moses-what-part-passed-had-to-come-to-pass/


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 25, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> I will leave you this to ponder on about the ceremonial law passing , then back to Hebrews.http://donkpreston.com/the-passing-of-the-law-of-moses-what-part-passed-had-to-come-to-pass/



It does appear that either all of it has passed or none of it has passed.
This is why we have Torah keeping Christians.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 25, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> It does appear that either all of it has passed or none of it has passed.



If the Pharisees understood, and correctly interpreted, the law, i.e., the ceremony is the law, and if Paul was incorrect, and the law is not spiritual (Rm. 7:14), then Jesus statement, Mat. 5:18, could be extended in that way.>>>edit: (the passing of the ceremony took the law with it.)  I think the Pharisees were wrong and Paul was right.<<<

When Jesus made his statement in Mat. 5:17,18, do you think He considered the Pharisees?;  vs. 20  “For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.”


----------



## gordon 2 (May 25, 2015)

I find it interesting that I'm blind to your "law" as "ceremony idea...?????


----------



## hummerpoo (May 25, 2015)

The ceremony is not the law, it is a shadow.

There is another place to start that ends up the same place.

Does this sound like the root of His law is the sacrifices, the ceremonies?

Isaiah 1:
11 “What are your multiplied sacrifices to Me?”
Says the LORD.
“I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams
And the fat of fed cattle;
And I take no pleasure in the blood of bulls, lambs or goats.
12 “When you come to appear before Me,
Who requires of you this trampling of My courts?
13 “Bring your worthless offerings no longer,
Incense is an abomination to Me.
New moon and sabbath, the calling of assemblies—
I cannot endure iniquity and the solemn assembly.
14 “I hate your new moon festivals and your appointed feasts,
They have become a burden to Me;
I am weary of bearing them.
15 “So when you spread out your hands in prayer,
I will hide My eyes from you;
Yes, even though you multiply prayers,
I will not listen.
Your hands are covered with blood.
16 “Wash yourselves, make yourselves clean;
Remove the evil of your deeds from My sight.
Cease to do evil,
17 Learn to do good;
Seek justice,
Reprove the ruthless,
Defend the orphan,
Plead for the widow.

Amos 5:
21 “I hate, I reject your festivals,
Nor do I delight in your solemn assemblies.
22 “Even though you offer up to Me burnt offerings and your grain offerings,
I will not accept them;
And I will not even look at the peace offerings of your fatlings.
23 “Take away from Me the noise of your songs;
I will not even listen to the sound of your harps.
24 “But let justice roll down like waters
And righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.


How is it that God hates obedience of His law?
He doesn’t, the sacrifices/ceremonies are not His law.
His law is righteousness. (He reveals details)
His law is a description of “His people”.
Only His people are empowered by Him to righteousness.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 25, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> The ceremony is not the law, it is a shadow.
> 
> There is another place to start that ends up the same place.
> 
> ...


 

 The Sabbath along with all the feast  Sabbaths. Fulfilled or not?


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 25, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> If the Pharisees understood, and correctly interpreted, the law, i.e., the ceremony is the law, and if Paul was incorrect, and the law is not spiritual (Rm. 7:14), then Jesus statement, Mat. 5:18, could be extended in that way.>>>edit: (the passing of the ceremony took the law with it.)  I think the Pharisees were wrong and Paul was right.<<<
> 
> When Jesus made his statement in Mat. 5:17,18, do you think He considered the Pharisees?;  vs. 20  “For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.”



Yes verse 20 does say that about righteousness but we know salvation isn't about our righteousness. Perhaps it was until all was fulfilled. Then our salvation became totally based on the work of Jesus and not based on our righteousness.
It's kinda like when Paul tells us in other letters who won't enter the Kingdom. Then he says "and such were some of you but you were washed."

If we read on in Matthew 5 we see the Old is replaced with the New. The Old law is now placed in our heart. The old written law of murder now expands to even anger as an example now placed in our heart.
I know I'm not very good explaining this.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 25, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> The Sabbath along with all the feast  Sabbaths. Fulfilled or not?



There are many definitions of “fulfill”.  Not knowing which you intend, I’ll take a shot at a couple.

Fulfill: to bring to an end.
Yes and No.  As the Sabbath was interpreted by the Pharisees in Mat. 12:2, 10; Mark 2:24, 3:2; and Luke 6:2, 7 it could not actually be brought to an end, because it never was that Sabbath.

Fulfill: to develop the full potentialities of.
Yes and No.  When Christ interpreted the Sabbath in Mat. 12:3-8, 11-21; Mark 2:25-28, 3:4, 5; and Luke 6:3-5, 8-10, He developed the full potentiality of the concept of Sabbath.  He filled that potentiality Himself.  Although His interpretation stands today as a guide to the spiritual rest our gracious Heavenly Father has made available to us, and as a goal to which all disciples aspire, I do not believe that we manifest the full potential available to us for spiritual rest.

If your intent was another definition of “fulfill”, please reply and I will attempt to respond.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 25, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yes verse 20 does say that about righteousness but we know salvation isn't about our righteousness. Perhaps it was until all was fulfilled. Then our salvation became totally based on the work of Jesus and not based on our righteousness.
> It's kinda like when Paul tells us in other letters who won't enter the Kingdom. Then he says "and such were some of you but you were washed."
> 
> If we read on in Matthew 5 we see the Old is replaced with the New. The Old law is now placed in our heart. The old written law of murder now expands to even anger as an example now placed in our heart.I know I'm not very good explaining this.



When Jesus says "but I say to you", I don't think he's saying this is a change, I think he's saying this is the way it is (like always has been).

Art, Sweetie just reminded me that I've got something that has to be done.  I'll try to get back to this, and that depends on an old messy mind, so please pray for me.
Thanks


----------



## Israel (May 26, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> When Jesus says "but I say to you", I don't think he's saying this is a change, I think he's saying this is the way it is (like always has been).
> 
> Art, Sweetie just reminded me that I've got something that has to be done.  I'll try to get back to this, and that depends on an old messy mind, so please pray for me.
> Thanks



now is the axe laid to the root...


----------



## hobbs27 (May 26, 2015)

Israel said:


> now is the axe laid to the root...



 Just a few more of the many many time statements.


 "His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire."

Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Blessed _is_ he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time _is_ at hand.

Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.

Jesus said to him, "If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!"

http://biblehub.com/kjv/john/21.htm


----------



## hobbs27 (May 26, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> There are many definitions of “fulfill”.  Not knowing which you intend, I’ll take a shot at a couple.
> 
> Fulfill: to bring to an end.
> Yes and No.  As the Sabbath was interpreted by the Pharisees in Mat. 12:2, 10; Mark 2:24, 3:2; and Luke 6:2, 7 it could not actually be brought to an end, because it never was that Sabbath.
> ...




To bring to an end was good.

I'm assuming here that even a ,( yes and no) answer is greater than just a comma or period.
 So if the least mark of the law has been fulfilled or brought to an end, heaven and earth has passsed. Heaven and earth being figuritive language as it was used in Deuteronomy, and Isaiah representative of Israel's economy, the priests, and temple, etc.


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 26, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> When Jesus says "but I say to you", I don't think he's saying this is a change, I think he's saying this is the way it is (like always has been).
> 
> Art, Sweetie just reminded me that I've got something that has to be done.  I'll try to get back to this, and that depends on an old messy mind, so please pray for me.
> Thanks



Then I must ask; what did Jesus really do?


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 26, 2015)

Concerning "change."

Hebrews 7:12
For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 26, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Then I must ask; what did Jesus really do?



Art, my first thought was to respond in the order posted, but this is just too good a question to wait for.  Not because I have the answer to end all answers; I certainly don’t, but because anyone attempting an answer must inspect the foundations of their faith.

A truly comprehensive answer would require the whole of the NT and some major portion of the OT (perhaps all).  There is a temptation to make a list of things, then prioritize them, but even making the list is far too daunting, as anything left out would constitute an affront that we should not approach.

In the context of our current discussion, and without the slightest color to any other thing done, or claim of completeness; 15 “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” (Col. 1); 3 And He is the radiance of His [God’s] glory and the exact representation of His [God’s] nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.  (Heb. 1) (that goes beyond what He did in the incarnation, which I assumed was the focus of your question, and speaks to who He is, but I don’t see them as easily separable).

My attempt to summarize this would include “ God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world” (Heb 1), and would come out something like: Jesus, building upon that which was laid down before, enhanced and clarified the revelation of God by His perfect representation of His nature.  
Note: enhanced the revelation, not the substance.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 26, 2015)

Israel said:


> now is the axe laid to the root...



To what does the tree correspond?
I guess I’m asking, if the tree is bad, what bad is it; or something more definitive if you could?
I’m searching for a great big wall and can’t seem to find it.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 26, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> There are many definitions of “fulfill”.  Not knowing which you intend, I’ll take a shot at a couple.
> 
> Fulfill: to bring to an end.
> Yes and No.  As the Sabbath was interpreted by the Pharisees in Mat. 12:2, 10; Mark 2:24, 3:2; and Luke 6:2, 7 it could not actually be brought to an end, because it never was that Sabbath.
> ...





hobbs27 said:


> To bring to an end was good.
> 
> I'm assuming here that even a ,( yes and no) answer is greater than just a comma or period.
> So if the least mark of the law has been fulfilled or brought to an end, heaven and earth has passsed. Heaven and earth being figuritive language as it was used in Deuteronomy, and Isaiah representative of Israel's economy, the priests, and temple, etc.



I did the best I could with your question, as asked.  Please give me the courtesy of responding to my statement, and not the statement you imagined.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 26, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Concerning "change."
> 
> Hebrews 7:12
> For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also.



Yes, that took some explaining to the redeemed Jews: how the former priests, who were Levites that God had appointed under the ceremonial law to administer the sacrifices had been replaced, by God, with His Son who was born, genealogically, into the tribe of Judah.  The way I understand it is, you start with a priest under the ceremonial law and go up the line which goes through Aaron and gets you to Levi then Jacob then Abraham.  Because Abraham tithed to Melchezidek, showing a lesser position, and Jesus was a priest of the order of Melchezidek (Ps. 110:4), that established Jesus to be a priest of a higher order.  It’s all there in chapter 7.  Study it through and let me know if I have crossed any wires.

The administrator of the law must be changed because the former administrator has been replaced.


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 26, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> Yes, that took some explaining to the redeemed Jews: how the former priests, who were Levites that God had appointed under the ceremonial law to administer the sacrifices had been replaced, by God, with His Son who was born, genealogically, into the tribe of Judah.  The way I understand it is, you start with a priest under the ceremonial law and go up the line which goes through Aaron and gets you to Levi then Jacob then Abraham.  Because Abraham tithed to Melchezidek, showing a lesser position, and Jesus was a priest of the order of Melchezidek (Ps. 110:4), that established Jesus to be a priest of a higher order.  It’s all there in chapter 7.  Study it through and let me know if I have crossed any wires.
> 
> The administrator of the law must be changed because the former administrator has been replaced.



In due time. It's hard to stay in chapter 3 and not look ahead. Perhaps the word "covenant" in Hebrews was an interpreter's way of explaining priesthood changes.

Will anything change when heaven & earth pass? Will anything ever change? 
It's hard to believe nothing ever changes with all of these covenant changes, priesthood changes, Jews, Gentiles, Kingdoms, Old persons, New persons, before the fall, after the fall, before the cross, after the cross, physical death, spiritual death, eternal death, everlasting life, and most importantly the "washing."


----------



## hobbs27 (May 26, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> I did the best I could with your question, as asked.  Please give me the courtesy of responding to my statement, and not the statement you imagined.



I appreciate you doing the best you could. Please forgive me for not understanding your answer correctly. I still don't evidently, but that's ok, things will become more and more clear as we move along


----------



## gordon 2 (May 26, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> Art, my first thought was to respond in the order posted, but this is just too good a question to wait for.  Not because I have the answer to end all answers; I certainly don’t, but because anyone attempting an answer must inspect the foundations of their faith.
> 
> A truly comprehensive answer would require the whole of the NT and some major portion of the OT (perhaps all).  There is a temptation to make a list of things, then prioritize them, but even making the list is far too daunting, as anything left out would constitute an affront that we should not approach.
> 
> ...



Not bad, not bad at all. I like.


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 26, 2015)

gordon 2 said:


> Not bad, not bad at all. I like.



Nothing changed when God became a man?
Jesus didn't abolish the Law but "enhanced" it?


----------



## hummerpoo (May 27, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Nothing changed when God became a man?



Personally, I would rather stay with what we have been told, and not assume we have been told everything.
We have been told: 6 “For I, the LORD, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed (Mal. 6).



> Jesus didn't abolish the Law but "enhanced" it?



Jesus didn’t enhance the law, He enhanced the revelation (what we have been told by God)
 of the ceremonial law (which was a shadow of God’s relationship with His people) by living His life on earth in relationship with God as an example for us.  Another way: God’s relationship with His people didn’t change, how He told us about it did change (the old way was the sacrifices and ceremonies, the new way is Jesus exemplary life).  This does not affect the moral law (describes how God’s people live their lives) or the civil law (describes how God’s people relate to each other; handling disputes, etc.).


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 27, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> Personally, I would rather stay with what we have been told, and not assume we have been told everything.
> We have been told: 6 “For I, the LORD, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed (Mal. 6).
> 
> 
> ...



You bring up ceremonial law as "changing" if in fact we are no longer required to keep it. Isn't this a change?
Why isn't ceremonial law considered a jot or tittle?
By removing ceremonial law haven't we removed a jot or tittle?


----------



## Artfuldodger (May 27, 2015)

Do you see Paul describing any "change?"

Romans 10:1-13 
1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

5 For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them. 6 But the righteousness based on faith says, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down) 7 “or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart” (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); 9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Galatians 3:7-14
7 Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” 9 So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

10 For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.” 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for “The righteous shall live by faith.” 12 But the law is not of faith, rather “The one who does them shall live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree”— 14 so that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith.


----------



## Day trip (May 27, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Nothing changed when God became a man?
> Jesus didn't abolish the Law but "enhanced" it?



Correct.  He showed us what the law could not.  It's not about sacrifices and ceremonies and laws for the sake of laws.  It is truth.  Understand what is real and obey truth and you will follow the laws but so much more.  We don't need laws, we need to open our eyes to truth.  The Kingdom of God is at hand; see it, obey it and it will continue to reveal itself to you.  Fight truth and you fight God, and you will lose every time.  Very simple.  Too simple almost so we try to re-create rules and laws because we refuse to see the simple truth.  If you drop an apple, it falls to the ground, begin with that and the truth will reveal itself.


----------



## hobbs27 (May 27, 2015)

Day trip said:


> Correct.  He showed us what the law could not.  It's not about sacrifices and ceremonies and laws for the sake of laws.  It is truth.  Understand what is real and obey truth and you will follow the laws but so much more.  We don't need laws, we need to open our eyes to truth.  The Kingdom of God is at hand; see it, obey it and it will continue to reveal itself to you.  Fight truth and you fight God, and you will lose every time.  Very simple.  Too simple almost so we try to re-create rules and laws because we refuse to see the simple truth.  If you drop an apple, it falls to the ground, begin with that and the truth will reveal itself.



I believe the law, and especially the feast Sabbath s pointed to Christ. Once Christ atonement was complete, the law was no more.
 This is the qualifier of heaven and earth passing away in Matthew 5:17-18. 
The Law is gone, therefore heaven and earth have passed. The only way you can say heaven and earth have not passed is to say the law is in tact... Every single jot and tittle.

Even the law of blessings and cursings which is called the law Deuteronomy 28.., The Sabbath and all its feasts, and the Hebrew diet, all should be practiced if heaven and earth have not passed.

Unless someone can show an obvious out for this? Moving along ..Back to Hebrews


----------



## hobbs27 (May 27, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> It does appear that either all of it has passed or none of it has passed.
> This is why we have Torah keeping Christians.


 

 I just witnessed a debate on this very topic with a 7th day adventist. The sda, make's the claim a couple here have , in that the law is divided. The person debating him made the claim that Torah is Torah and not divided in scripture anywhere.

 Apparently he is correct Torah is not divided, and dividing it is one of the reasons we have sabbatarians today..as you said.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 27, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> I appreciate you doing the best you could. Please forgive me for not understanding your answer correctly. I still don't evidently, but that's ok, things will become more and more clear as we move along



If I have failed to convey my understanding that the “Pharisees, and their ilk” taught a false Sabbath, and that God, through Moses, and Jesus taught the true Sabbath, being God’s promise of spiritual rest for His people, perhaps Hebrews 4 will provide words that are more understood.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 27, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> You bring up ceremonial law as "changing" if in fact we are no longer required to keep it. Isn't this a change?
> Why isn't ceremonial law considered a jot or tittle?
> By removing ceremonial law haven't we removed a jot or tittle?



If I stand beyond the head of your shadow, and, using a halogen work light, eliminate your shadow, do you change, or are you made more visible?  Will the freckle on you forearm disappear  (that’s the jot)?

You might look back at #28.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 27, 2015)

Artfuldodger said:


> Do you see Paul describing any "change?"
> 
> Romans 10:1-13
> 1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
> ...



No, I don’t, do you?


----------



## hummerpoo (May 27, 2015)

Day trip said:


> Correct.  He showed us what the law could not.  It's not about sacrifices and ceremonies and laws for the sake of laws.  It is truth.  Understand what is real and obey truth and you will follow the laws but so much more.  We don't need laws, we need to open our eyes to truth.  The Kingdom of God is at hand; see it, obey it and it will continue to reveal itself to you.  Fight truth and you fight God, and you will lose every time.  Very simple.  Too simple almost so we try to re-create rules and laws because we refuse to see the simple truth.  If you drop an apple, it falls to the ground, begin with that and the truth will reveal itself.



 Love it!


----------



## hummerpoo (May 27, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> I just witnessed a debate on this very topic with a 7th day adventist. The sda, make's the claim a couple here have , in that the law is divided. The person debating him made the claim that Torah is Torah and not divided in scripture anywhere.
> 
> Apparently he is correct Torah is not divided, and dividing it is one of the reasons we have sabbatarians today..as you said.



Is a link available?


----------



## hobbs27 (May 28, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> Is a link available?


 
 No, it was in a closed FB group. I will post two short videos from Dons book promotion on the subject. I have not purchased or read this book yet. I look forward to the rest of Hebrews with you and all the rest. Thanks.


----------



## hummerpoo (May 28, 2015)

hobbs27 said:


> No, it was in a closed FB group. I will post two short videos from Dons book promotion on the subject. I have not purchased or read this book yet. I look forward to the rest of Hebrews with you and all the rest. Thanks.



Thanks, I guess I'll pass.  Everybody reports a win after a theological debate.


----------



## Israel (May 28, 2015)

hummerpoo said:


> To what does the tree correspond?
> I guess I’m asking, if the tree is bad, what bad is it; or something more definitive if you could?
> I’m searching for a great big wall and can’t seem to find it.


It is as you said, not an expansion, not an adding to the law, "don't murder+(now) don't hate" "don't commit adultery+(now) don't even lust"...but the revelation of how things are. Have always (as you say) been.

That which is born of the flesh, is flesh...
No provision for making the flesh..."better", more acceptable if it can just "do" what's added...

What the law is written to, though the law be spiritual...is flesh...to do "to" that flesh as is revealed in Christ in the fullness of time.
The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world...


----------



## gordon 2 (May 28, 2015)

Israel said:


> It is as you said, not an expansion, not an adding to the law, "don't murder+(now) don't hate" "don't commit adultery+(now) don't even lust"...but the revelation of how things are. Have always (as you say) been.
> 
> That which is born of the flesh, is flesh...
> No provision for making the flesh..."better", more acceptable if it can just "do" what's added...
> ...




Hey Isreal, what does "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world..." mean? Did this happen when Adam and Eve wrecked their relationship with God, or was Jesus slain before this? Serious question.???


----------

