RL Solberg thank you for your service in teaching the scriptures. I hope you know that these have been helping me and my family detox from years of HRM teaching. It’s good to be back to focusing on Jesus Christ!
Jesus is the way of salvation! Jesus took our sin upon Himself (2 Corinthians 5:21). Jesus died in our place (Romans 5:8), taking the punishment that we deserve. Three days later, Jesus rose from the dead, proving His victory over sin and death (Romans 6:4-5). Why did He do it? Jesus answered that question Himself: “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). Jesus died so that we could live. If we place our faith in Jesus, trusting His death as the payment for our sins, all of our sins are forgiven and washed away. We will then have our spiritual hunger satisfied. The lights will be turned on. We will have access to a fulfilling life. We will know our true best friend and good shepherd. We will know that we will have life after we die-a resurrected life in heaven for eternity with Jesus!
@@noahcole6856 Thanks for asking, Noah! I believe that by the grace of God, we are saved through faith in Jesus and nothing else. Salvation is not something we earn by any good works we do, but rather a gift from God. I further believe we are saved in order to engage in good works to the honor and glory of Christ. "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do" (Eph. 2:8-10). Blessings, Rob
Those who insist that it is only by keeping the law I dont think realize that what they are saying is: they wish to be judged by their keeping of the law. Whereby No One was or is able to fully keep the Law in perfectness. You break one law, you have broken them all. Thank you, Father, thank you, Yeshua, thank you, Holy Spirit.
If you examine that "righteousness" it is talking about justification. Being JUSTIFIED through the atoning blood of the Messiah by faith, Romans3:21-25, vs 25 nails it. There is an exchange from the works of the law (the sacrificial system which blood could never take away sins Hebrews10:4) and the work of the Messiah, His blood does the work, Romans3:25, Hebrews10. Hebrews10 really explicitly tells you specifically explains the changing of the guard.
I totally agree, but the point of the video seems to be that we don't have to fulfill the law any longer. So why does he speak of fulfilling the law here? Are we to fulfill the law even though it is said that he did it for us? Yes, we are to fulfill the law.
Perfect! Masterfully handled. Thank you. In your ending it became so clear to me what "imputed righteousness" is, and "how" it is the only way that God can declare us worthy. He, God, as we (shall) stand before Him, will see us "as if" The Son stands in our place. This does not imply (to me, at least) that I will not have to render account for my actions, words, and motives, on the contrary, here is where the worthless will be burned as hay and stubble.What remains, thereafter, is what I receive reward for. My entrance is assured, soley on my faith in Christ. Not as eloquent of a response as yours, but my spirit understands.
A show of faith is the ultimate conceit. Ethics from faith gives us the worst navigators, like Moses, believing travel is best done with one foot in fantasyland. Is the faith vocabulary a dog-whistle for Christofascists? Does anything prove faith worthy of respect more than finding prophets & cherubim in the Yellow Pages? Faith gives us preaching to the choir & wolves dressed as sheep, violence justified using the vocabulary of fantasyland. Faith ignores "it is a wicked generation seeking signs", such as resurrections. The great evil of faith is being a tool of authoritarians, a mask for insanity & indoctrinating children with a fantasyland. It is delusional to promote democracy when the country is owned by Citizens United & billionaires. The attraction for low esteem, is the power of delusions of greatness, having some relationship with a deity. Low esteem is masked with ultimate audacity, at knowing this or that of God. Faith gives us preaching to the choir & wolves dressed as sheep, violence justified using the vocabulary of fantasyland. Faith ignores "it is a wicked generation seeking signs", such as resurrections. Does anything prove faith worthy of respect more than finding prophets & cherubim in the Yellow Pages?
@ wow you are really good with words. I would say you misunderstood what faith means from Jesus’s standpoint and thats understandable because of how many times people have said faith. Faith in the same way the scientists like Einstein look at the evidence and interpret the universe to have had a start and conclude - “the evidence points to this conclusion, so I trust this conclusion until proven otherwise.” The evidence, recognized by world religions, atheist historians and philosophers, and by martyrs and living testimonies of his resurrection, Jesus is of much importance and is special. Jesus DID die on a cross, and may have just risen from the dead. Those who have taken Jesus’s teaching to love their enemies, respect all people, and live a moral life have changed the fabric of culture from the abolition of slavery to the civil rights movement while those who misinterpret his teachings are their opponents. So I say, looking at the evidence, “the evidence points to this man Jesus really being who he said he is and rising from the grave and being of utmost importance and benefit to our lives, thus I put my faith, my trust in his words.” What do you think?
Great breakdown of those passages! Verse 19 was Yeshua's "preamble" for the beginning of the teaching of the commandments he referred to when he said, "Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of "THESE" commandments," then from verse 21, he proceeded until the end of chapter 7 to elucidate the commandments he was referring to. There's a difference from someone not eating things for health concerns and commemorating times of the year for exhibitibg their love of Christ, but when those things are done out of the belief that doing those things make you righteous or the belief that YHWH will send you to eternal damnation for not worshipping on the Gregorian Saturday, gives a distorted view of Christ's love for us! The promises were given to Abraham, a Hebrew, but not an Israelite, who came from a family of paganism, neither Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, nor the Israelites in Egypt prior to the coming of Moses were given the Levitical Law Galatians 3:19-25! ❤️
Thank you for that excellent comment. When the law is used for righteousness, it becomes a stumbling block for our spiritual edification and that of others.
@@theophosticphil The law is not for the sake of righteousness. We got baptized (this is also a commandment) because we wanted to get closer to Christ. The same is done freely, out of love, for any commandment. It should be encouraged. It is not obligatory, the same way you cannot force someone to give charity from their heart. But we know that charity it good, but is also a commandment.
Paul also uses the word "till" in Galatians 3:16-29. Paul said the law was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "till" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made. In Galatians 4:24-31 Paul spoke of the "two covenants" and instructed the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai Covenant of "bondage". New Covenant Whole Gospel: How many modern Christians cannot honestly answer the questions below? Who is the King of Israel in John 1:49? Is the King of Israel now the Head of the Church, and are we His Body? Who is the “son” that is the “heir” to the land in Matthew 21:37-43? Why did God allow the Romans to destroy the Old Covenant temple and the Old Covenant city, about 40 years after His Son fulfilled the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 in blood at Calvary? What the modern Church needs is a New Covenant Revival (Heb. 9:10) in which members of various denominations are willing to re-examine everything they believe and see if it agrees with the Bible, instead of the traditions of men. We need to be like the Bereans. It will be a battle between our flesh and the Holy Spirit. It will not be easy. If you get mad and upset when someone challenges your man-made Bible doctrines, that is your flesh resisting the truth found in God's Word. Nobody can completely understand the Bible unless they understand the relationship between the Old Covenant given to Moses at Mount Sinai and the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary. God is not now a “racist”. He has extended His love to all races of people through the New Covenant fulfilled by His Son’s blood at Calvary. The Apostle Paul warned against using “genealogies” in our faith in 1 Tim. 1:4, and Titus 3:9. If the New Covenant is "everlasting" in Hebrews 13:20 and the Old Covenant is "obsolete" in Hebrews 8:13, why would any Christian believe God is going back to the Old Covenant system during a future time period?
Another great teaching. Thank you so much for helping me out of the errors of Torahism! I might suggest that Heaven and Earth are idioms for the temple and Jerusalem, both of which were destroyed in 70 AD.
Cosmic deconstruction language is sometimes used of nations or kingdoms being conquered or destroyed, I'm not sure of temple or a city though. Maybe speaking of the age of the Old Covenant coming to an end?
I definitely hold to this view. If you look at carefully examination of Matthew 24, Mark 13:1-8, and Luke 21:5-9 it speaks about judgment and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.
Another way that fulfilled is used is this; Galatians 5:14 [14]For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. For what it's worth.
☝️😁👍 Just finished my first run-through of this (because it's meaty enough I'll need at least a couple more "listens" to absorb everything), thanks! Also have been reading the comments & for the most part am disappointed, because it's mostly the same ol' same ol' "Yeah, but" Squad saying the same ol' things they always say (i.e. not really engaging honestly with the content & some obviously didn't even bother to watch the video they're so vehemently objecting to), but TG there are a couple fresh voices I find interesting... To sum: I shall return 😅
@@TRINITYTVint are we cherry pickers??? What do you mean which law??? How about every law that we cannot possibly keep such as the temple and sacrificial laws??? And that means, yes, the Sabbath laws, holy days, dietary laws and how we treat others still apply which are what the ten commandments actually teach. The first four teach how to love God and the following six how to love others. Cherry picking will not profit anybody. How about this? What did Jesus do? Did Jesus keep all of the law??? How about the apostles in the first century, did they? Of course they did, and they did only because they had the Spirit of Christ in them. Or do you think that the Spirit that led Christ into keeping all of the law will lead anyone of us into doing this differently???
@@rdaleyj1 the Spirit of God is not given so that we can keep Moses laws, he is sealed in us so that we can keep Jesus commands. BTW Jesus was sinless even before the Spirit came upon him when he was baptised. Everyone who tries to be right with God by works is under the power of sin, and rules and regulations empower the sin nature, that's why we must die to human regulations and laws. so that we can be freed from the power of sin and death, and live by the 'law of the Spirit of life' and the law of Christ. This only applies to the body of Christ, not the wolves and foxes who try to usurp the message of the cross.
I would suggest that the "until" H&E shows from their worldview the temple represents the heavens and the earth. It was the witness which is why Jesus prophesied it's destruction. Once that faded away the fullness of of the new Covenant which was already taking hold was able to fully be implemented...
That is the Crux for the Hebrew roots movement will have as a hill to die on..... They will say something like this, see I can walk out my door and see Heaven and Earth is still here so clearly the law is in full effect. Psalm 78:69 is: "He built his sanctuary like the high heavens, like the earth, which he has founded for ever." The actual holy place and most holy place inside the Temple building were constructed like earth and heaven. The courts outside represented the sea.
@@CHURCHofX agree 100 Percent this is missed by those who are un-familiar with how heaven and earth was depicted in ancient israel look into covenant eschatology, I pray more can come to understand these things.
@@CHURCHofX been guilty of exactly that 🤣🤣 I since read the apostolic fathers and went over church history and left Hebrew roots after 7 years. Now convinced of orthodoxy having read the letters of the church father's and how the faith was originally taught and performed
Deut. 30 mentions heaven and earth as the two witnesses of the mosaic covenant. When they are removed, i.e. Rev 20, then all is fulfilled. Until then, if you hold to all is fulfilled, then you should be consistent and become a full preterist. Just how I see it. Please tell me where I'm wrong. Eschatology and theology are interlinked. You can't argue for one without seeing the other. To argue anti-nomionism is to be a full preterist.
Great point on how pleroo is used in Matthew. A comment on righteousness. The verses You used when talking about righteousness said it was God's Righteousness that we received through Christ. It seems scripture is saying that The Father prepared a lamb sacrifice that took 4 thousand years to come about and nurtured Him and became His most beloved lamb from the flock and was brought to the heavenly temple and made us acceptable in God's sight but it was God's Righteousness that it brought about. You definitely jumped in the fire (of debate) with this video. Thanks
I keep hearing the Torah roots movement talking about if we are not Israel we need to be grafted in and once you accept Jesus you are grafted in which means now I have to start doing Jewish things Torah things, can you help me and explain this to me what grafted in means?
Fulfilled≠abolished≠destroyed. I love pointing out that in fulfilling the law, He abolished the law, but didn't destroy it, so that He can forever reap the rewards for fulfilling it
We know from scripture that "all" doesn't always literally mean ALL. In the case of Matt: 5:17-19, ALL WAS FULFILLED with His death and resurrection. He declared: "It is finished!" John 19:28 (NKJV) tells us, "After this, Jesus, knowing that ALL things were now accomplished [finished], that the Scripture [Tanakh] might be FULFILLED, said, 'I thirst!'" Also, in Luke (in the parallel verses to Matthew 24), which are about the destruction of the temple, Yeshua says this: Luke 21:22 (NKJV): "For these are the days of vengeance, that ALL things which are written may be FULFILLED." Acts 3:18 echoes Matt. 5:17-19: "But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus FULFILLED."
@nancykindt6487 19 hours ago We know from scripture that "all" doesn't always literally mean ALL. In the case of Matt: 5:17-19, ALL WAS FULFILLED with His death and resurrection. He declared: "It is finished!" *Well, all that concerned his first coming was fulfilled by his death and resurrection, but it is trivial to demonstrate that not all the prophecies concerning Christ were fulfilled back at his first coming. Christ himself in Matthew 23 said he could not gather the people which is part of the prophecy of Deuteronomy 30 which Christ comes back in Matthew 24 and argues will be fulfilled at his second coming when the trumpet is blown and his angels gather his people from the ends of heaven. Christ in Isaiah 63 coming with died garments from Bozrah after treading the winefat doesn’t happen until his second coming either as explained by John in Revelation 19 when Christ will tread the winepress of Almighty God. Christ’s coming at the end of Isaiah 59 is another prophecy Christ did not fulfill, and there are many others. But, Christ did not claim that “Till I go and die on the cross, not one jot or tittle shall in anywise pass from the law.” Instead, Christ gives the sign of Heaven and earth passing away, a sign he comes back to show John after the cross in Revelation 21:1. So, Christ was trying to preserve the law of Moses, not get rid of it. If he had been teaching contrary to the law of Moses, Isaiah 8:20 would declare there is no light in him, and his title “the light of the world” would have no meaning or legitimacy. But, in verse 16 he wants our light to shine and to do good works, because those are the good works of the law in line with Isaiah 8:20. Because in Isaiah 8:16, God is trying to bind up the testimony and seal the law among his disciples, not take the law away from them. Binding the testimony to the right hand and sealing the law on the forehead is from the Mosaic law in Deuteronomy 6. It is the protection God’s people need to keep them from taking the mark of the beast in their right hand and forehead instead in Revelation 14. Because those who get the victory over the beast and his image in Revelation 15 stand on the sea of glass singing the song of Moses and the Lamb: demonstrating how relevant Moses is in these end times. But, sadly, many Christians do not want that victory, and they teach people to come out from under the law and reject Moses.
@@coreybray9834 Judging from past experience trying to reason with you at length, I believe continuing to do so would be a waste of time as there is still a veil over your heart and you refuse to see your errors.
Mat 5.17 ¶Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. We read about heaven and earth passing away in chptr 24. Pretty sure that hasnt happened yet. 1Jhn 5.3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. Is the love of God grievous? Rev 12.17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. Paul teaches we are grafted in. Are you?
He who sins (disobey’s the Father’s commandment’s) is of the devil. Of course our current serpent teachers say, go ahead, disobey. You won’t surely die. God loves you. Just “believe”.
@docscantlin We all have sinned and miss the mark. Believers in Yeshua don't come up for condemnation. Doent mean Grace is a license to continue breaking God's Law. We must learn and do. I grew up without God's Law. Late in life when I got here. Had to weed out all the false teachings. Scripture teaches Scripture. When you come across a contradiction, know that it's man made. Truth is in the Scriptures.
Jesus is superseding the Law. All the Law can do is tell you that you are a lawbreaker. Jesus already knows that those of us of age (should know the difference between right and wrong) are sinners. His blood can cleanse us of all our sins continually, if we chose by faith to believe that Jesus is our Savior.
The ten commandments ea not avlvolushed but the ceremonial was fulfilled thus all of that law is no longer necessary. We do not make sacrifices or any of the ceremonies and ritual cleansing that were necessary under the ceremonial law. The ceremonial law was kept outside the ark because this law was a foreshadow of the Messiah. If we continue to keep the ceremonial law when we are rejecting Jesus sacrifice. The ceremonial law is not the moral law, that was kept inside the ark.
Psalm 78 is connected with Matthew 5 if you look up the word stoma and read Psalm 78 and how it says to keep the Torah. also if you read on to where Yeshua said if your righteousness doesnt exceed that of the pharisees etc so read 1 John 3:7 and the psalm 119:142 for context
Jhn 15:10 If you keep My commandments, you shall abide in My love, even as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love. Jhn 5:46 For if you had believed Moses, you would have believed Me, for he wrote of Me. Jhn 5:47 But if you do not believe his writings, how shall you believe My Words? Act 15:21 For Moses from ages past has those in every city proclaiming him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. As new born again babes give them 4 commandments and as they go hear Moses being preached they’ll grow towards salvation by turning from lawlessness 2Pe 3:15 Bear in mind that the patience of our Lord means salvation-just as our dearly loved brother Paul also wrote to you with the wisdom given to him. 2Pe 3:16 He speaks about these matters in all of his letters. Some things in them are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist (as they also do with the rest of the Scriptures)-to their own destruction. 2Pe 3:17 Since you already know all this, loved ones, be on your guard so that you are not led astray by the error of the lawless and lose your sure footing. 2Pe 3:18 Instead, keep growing in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Yeshua the Messiah. To Him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity! Amen. 1Pe 2:2 As newborn babes, long for pure spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow toward salvation- 1Pe 2:3 now that you have tasted that the Lord is good. Psa 19:7 The law of the Lord is perfect, converting souls: the testimony of the Lord is faithful, instructing babes. Deu 6:1 “And this [is] the command, the statutes and the judgments which your God YHWH has commanded to teach you to do in the land which you are passing over there to possess it, Deu 6:2 so that you fear your God YHWH, to keep all His statutes and His commands which I am commanding you, you, and your son, and your son’s son, all [the] days of your life, and so that your days are prolonged. 1Jn 2:3 Now we know that we have come to know Him by this-if we keep His commandments. 1Jn 2:4 The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him. 1Jn 2:5 But whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God is truly made perfect. We know that we are in Him by this- 1Jn 2:6 whoever claims to abide in Him must walk just as He walked. 1Co 11:1 Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Messiah. If Yeshua walked in the commandments of His Father and we are to imitate Him then we would walk in His footsteps being led by His Spirit Yeshua didn’t bring a new doctrine of His own Jhn 7:16 Yeshua answered, “My teaching is not from Me, but from Him who sent Me. Jhn 7:17 If anyone wants to do His will, he will know whether My teaching comes from God or it is Myself speaking. Jhn 7:18 Whoever speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but He who seeks the glory of the One who sent Him, He is true and there is no unrighteousness in Him. Jhn 7:19 Hasn’t Moses given you the Torah? Yet none of you keeps it. Why are you trying to kill Me?” That there is the most perfect answer of scripture Yeshua said if you do the will of God you’ll know if i teach my own doctrine or its from God and then He says you don’t keep the Torah so youre not doing Gods will I delight to do Your will, O my God. Yes, Your Torah is within my being.” Psalm 40:8
0:00 Matthew 5:17-20-which is that passage that starts with Jesus saying, “I have not come to abolish the law and the prophets but to fulfill them”- that’s probably the most common proof text used by our “Torah-keeping” friends to bolster their belief that Christians are required to keep the old covenant law. *Well, if Christ is saying he didn’t come to abolish the law, and Christians start spouting that the law is abolished by Christ on the cross, then they are just striving to make a liar out of Christ. Christ is called “The light of the world” and that indicates that his doctrine can pass the test God set forth in Isaiah 8:20. If Christ came preaching against the law and the testimony, he wouldn’t be able to legitimately be called the light of the world, because Isaiah 8:20 would declare there is no light in him. So, anyone teaching against the law and testimony, God has already judged there is no light in these people and that is 95% of Christian theologians and pastors today. And Christ warns us in Matthew 4:4 to live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God, like the words in Isaiah 8:20 that Christians are not living by because their pastors and theologians are not properly informing them of this critical test for light. And so, Professor, you should be starting a couple verses earlier and understanding why Christ tells his followers to let their light shine. The works Christ wanted his followers to perform in verse 16 were the good works of the law and testimony in line with Isaiah 8:20, so that when other men would see these light bearing works they would glorify God in heaven.* Solberg: And there’s no doubt that text speaks profoundly about the law and its enduring importance. But one thing it doesn’t say is that followers of Jesus are under that law. *And you think Christ would need to remind a circumcised Jewish audience who your own buddy Paul in Galatians 5 insists are debtors to do the whole law what their obligation to the law was??? LOL! Come on, Professor, every first century Jew in that audience would have known their basic obligation to keep the law of Moses, even Christ’s closest inner circle of followers, and the circumcised Christ himself. What should concern you more is Christ never tells us to come out from under the Mosaic law in the gospels. Because if he ever did that, any first century Jew familiar with Isaiah 8:20 would identify him as a liar and fraud who has no light in him immediately, arguing he is not the “light of the world” as claimed. I don’t think you properly understand what it is you are up against here and what kind of shame you are trying to heap on the character and reputation of Christ with your deep misunderstanding of Scripture here. If Christ wanted to test that boundry and blatantly violate Isaiah 8:20 and send the message that his followers should not keep the law of Moses, all he would have had to have said in the gospel is to “Stop circumcising”! That’s all he would have to say to break the Old Covenant once and for all. He never uttered those words before the cross, and he never uttered those words after the cross. Instead, man waited 20-years after Christ was gone in Acts 15 to conveniently start tampering with circumcision and the law. And they didn’t quote anything Christ actually said in Acts 15 as their reason for doing so, because they knew darn good and well Christ never promoted such abject nonsense against circumcision and the Mosaic law. And God foretold in Ezekiel 44 that their mistake in Acts 15 would lead to a future polluting of his house and breaking of his covenant the moment they bring uncircumcised strangers/gentiles into the future Davidic temple. The fact that God warns centuries in advance what their mistake would lead to should be enough to demonstrate just how wrong the early Christians were for abandoning circumcision and man’s obligation to the Mosaic law in the case of the strangers/gentiles. God instead, in Isaiah 56, invited the strangers/gentiles to come in and embrace his Sabbath and covenant, not be taught to reject those aspects of serving God under the Mosaic law like you are doing to deny them a name better than sons and daughters in God’s house. But, the last four verses of Isaiah 56 did warn us that shepherds like you would come in to mess things up for the strangers/gentiles in this respect. Funny how completely on top of things God is in the prophecies, like he knew you were coming to do this very harm to his people.
That mean is God from old testament that give the law to israel, keep HIS promises to israel till all fullfilled...all the law still valid to israel, eventhough they still dont believe Jesus Christ is their messiah, God will fullfill all HIS promises to israel..
Matthew was written before Mark. Mark concentrates on the actions of Jesus Christ. Mark's gospel concentrates mainly on the framework of Jesus's actions during His earthly ministry, as recorded by Matthew. (I think of Mark as being a Readers Digest version from Matthew. I know very few of you have ever heard about Readers Digest.) Matthew's theme, for his gospel, is about all the prophecies that the coming Messiah would fulfill and that Jesus fulfilled all these prophecies, signifying that He is the Messiah, the Christ. Matthew's gospel is totally wrapped around the Old Testament Messianic prophecies that Jesus fulfilled and the prophecies that Jesus has given us about the last days, which started with the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (Jesus, in our Bible, through His own teachings and His teachings He gave the authors of the New Testament books, has told us all the prophecies that we can expect to receive in these last days.) Jesus taught Paul, in Arabia, His gospel that He wanted Paul to spread to all us Gentiles and to share with all the Jews. Jesus, in His teachings to Paul, caused him to turn completely around from believing that he was righteous because he had the Law (also learned that Jesus was the only Jew who ever was fully obedient to the Law, thereby obedient to God the Father) to being an apostle telling the world that we could be saved, be righteous, only by faith in the belief that Jesus is our Savior, the Messiah, the Christ. Paul also learned that the most important way that us Christians should exhibit Christ in our lives is love. Paul, in 1 Timothy 1:8-11, tells us Christians how we should regard the Law: But we KNOW that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane,... according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.
Fulfill..to teach the full Law correctly thus bringing an END to the false interpretation of the educated religious establishment ( nothing new under the sun )..this is why He said, “ you have heard it say …BUT I SAY..He was teaching the Law correctly…teaching the Law in its fullness…the giver of the Law is HOLY and GOOD…that is why the Law is HOLY and GOOD…Got Torah Got Truth
@@Kenn-rb7gq oh sorry..ya.. I forgot you and Matthew were close buddies and he told you exactly what he meant by fulfill…your full of it..Got Torah Got Truth
@@Kenn-rb7gq Rob mentioned the context…it was to put an end to…that exactly how I used it To put an end to the false interpretation of the Law by the religious class ..and teaching the Law Fully..correctly..God is HOLY and GOOD…that’s why the scriptures say that the Law is HOLY and GOOD…which begs the question…why do so many who identify as Christians claim that God is good then try to CONvince others not to follow His good example…double minded people are not fit for His Kingdom..Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770 To put an end to the false interpretation? Where's that in the text? He's quoting Moses, the Law, not the false teachers' interpretation. ‘You shall not commit adultery’; - that's not a false interpretation, that's the Law of Moses.
From verse 19 up to the ends Jesus trying to teach them what the old laws can do to them if they want to keep it, and Jesus update the laws and take it where it's starting the damages is the heart, adultery only by looking you already committed adultery, and that's is the sad part trying to keep the laws, no one no not one will measures up.
@anthonypalelei8559 1 day ago From verse 19 up to the ends Jesus trying to teach them what the old laws can do to them if they want to keep it, and Jesus update the laws and take it where it's starting the damages is the heart, adultery only by looking you already committed adultery, *I guess I am fortunate, being mostly blind. I can’t look at women and get aroused anymore. LOL! Who ever said losing your sight wasn’t a blessing!* and that's is the sad part trying to keep the laws, no one no not one will measures up. *I think Lucifer agrees 100%. Why try to keep the law of a being who is impossible to please because he set the bar too high to set you up to fail? Like Lucifer in Revelation 12:17, you are on the cusp of joining his side of this war against commandment keepers. But, if Christians join Lucifer and reject God’s law, proving by Isaiah 8:20 there is no light in them, then what will the future of Christian anarchy produce if not a brutal hell for everyone involved once push really comes to shove just as Habakkuk 1:4 predicts??? God, on the otherhand, seems to think the days are coming in Isaiah 2:1-5 when the law will once again go forth from Zion. At this time, God will achieve something the anti-law Christians and all their anarchy could never achieve. He will demonstrate that with his law in place, the nations will beat their swords into pruning hooks and plowshares and not learn war anymore. So, maybe God’s law isn’t as impossible to keep as Christians are trying to make it appear. Maybe, as Isaiah 24:5-6 declares, what they are really begging for is the curse that devours the whole earth when God gets sick and tired of his law being transgressed. By the way, have you ever read Isaiah 8:16 in conjunction with Deuteronomy 6 and Revelation 14? There seems to be this thing in Scripture about what gets bound to your right hand and forhead. God seems to want to bind the testimony and seal his law in the foreheads of his people, but they don’t want his seal. What they would rather do is take the mark of the beast in their right hand and forehead instead. Proving to God every step of the way that there idea of rejecting his law and testimony is far better than being protected by it from the mark of the beast. But, I think God is the one who will have the last laugh on that front, because in Revelation 15, it is only those who sing the song of Moses and the Lamb ((The two prophets of Deuteronomy 18 who gave us the law and the gospel) who stand victorious on the sea of glass.
@@brianfixitguy2494 This silly argument that no one can keep God’s Laws perfectly is not well thought through. Bring it to a family level: There has been NO child that has ever kept all the Laws(Rules) of a household. So… we of course remove the requirements and our children can decide what is right in their own eyes. This is what repentance is all about. Final comment: Sin is transgression of the Law(Torah). 1John 3:4, Romans 3:20 and 7:7. This is Paul telling us so. Remember, 2Peter 3:15-19 tells us that if we don’t have a foundation in the Torah, we will miss understand Paul and become Lawless(without Torah). This website fulfills this prophecy perfectly.
Jesus forefilled them because we couldnt. Tha law is about sinfull behavior.. and we are by nature sinners. To complete them ( the sin of mankind )hefus had to sacrifice him self. On the cross
Actually, J Big, the Greek word translated into English as "abolish" is καταλύω (katalyō). And it means "destroy, tear down, abolish." This is why many translations use the English word "destroy" in Matt. 5:17 (ASV, ERV, LEB, KJV). Rob
Greetings from the Philippines...I love ur studies sir but i love Yahusha/Jesus so i obey His commandments as a sign of my obedience and my faith.shalom❤
do you obey God when He gave the Gentiles 4 restrictions then Commanded "No Greater Burden" or are you a Cultist and believe those In Christ should keep the Law of Moses? Shitlom
1 Corinthians 9:20-21 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law."
@@brianfixitguy2494 it's amazing! I'm going to make a new rule about 2nd sabbath which takes place any day of the week where I just don't feel like getting out of bed
In the KJV it reads: "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Which is what Jesus said he came to do in Mat 5:17. He refers back to this after His resurrection in Luke 24:44 - "that all things must be fulfilled" and mentions in Luke 24:48 "And ye are witnesses of these things."
@@tbishop4961. Jesus fulfilled the law. You are ignoring the part that says, "till all be fulfilled." Jesus fulfilled it before heaven and earth could pass away. The condition for the law continuing till heaven and earth pass away relies on it not being fulfilled.
John 14:21 Whoever has my commands and obeys them he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.
I think it we bring more Bible verses to interpret the meaning of Matthew 5:17-18,, like Jeremiah 31:31-33 because they break the laws so many times, Jesus wants to nails the laws to the cross Colossians 2:14-17, because the people were killed because of the laws Roman 7:7-14, the laws was good and holy but the people were rebellion, so the laws still be there, but it's not active anymore, it will be there as a written document to testify about Jesus Luke 24:44.
You seem to have made a mistake with the Matthew 2 reference regarding fulfil. The greek word used in that chapter is πληρωθῇ not πληρῶσαι (you said playrosy). In the LXX and new testament πληρῶσαι is used to mean fill up or consecrate.
Hi Simplemind. The Greek word in Matthew 2 is the same root word, it’s just a different case ending. In English, it would be kind of like the difference between: fulfill, fulfilled, fulfiller, fulfilling. And as I showed in my dozen or so examples, this is a word that Matthew consistently uses to mean “bring to a designed end,” specifically the fulfillment of prophecy. Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots if I look at the use of πληρῶσαι in the LXX and then find the corresponding words in the masoretic, they are mal-lo-wt (consecrate), mal-le (consecrate), me-lo (fill up) or mal-lam (fill their). Whereas πληρωθῇ corresponds to me-lot (ended) or miq-qes (at the end). There appears to be a difference in meaning not case endings? Please can you point me to material that I can read or watch regarding the case endings
@@TheBiblicalRoots You are double talking. You lost alot of credibility when you brought Myles Christian on and agreed with him. KJV. Whosoever therefore shall BREAK (not relax)one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Romans 8:13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
@TheBiblicalRoots I got halfway through, but I'll give it another go. I think what you need to be genuinely asking yourself is why the author wrote something so unclear that you need to add, delete, or redefine words in the passage to make it say what you think it should say. That's literally what every single one of you do with this passage
When people who have no relationship with God see you do this, they aren't impressed or fooled. They just think you've lied to them on behalf of Christians everywhere
@@TheBiblicalRootsyou continue to make the logical blunder of insisting that different books of the bible must be read in a way that "harmonizes" them or causes them to agree. They DON'T agree. You have to butcher the texts and intent of the authors to achieve your own intent
@@TheBiblicalRoots you need to go back to the beginning, read the law, and see what the law itself has to say about it's purpose, because you seem to not actually know the purpose
I know your intentions are good but you are painting your listeners into a corner. Try telling a Jewish person who knows tanakh that Matthew is citing predictive prophesies with his "fulfillment" passages and you set them up for humiliation. What Matthew actually does is to show the uncanny consistency between Jesus and the People throughout the generations. When you assume a zero-sum typology such that the antitype "New Moses" Jesus obliterates the ekktype "Old Moses" or the "Old Israel," you completely undermine Matthew's argument of continuity. It also doesn't truly support the Fulfillment-as-Replacement Hypothesis when you begin by applying that presumption to your citations from Matthew. DISCLAIMER: I am not a Torah observant Christian.
Thanks, PSA! I hear what you're saying, though I see things differently. I agree with you that Matthew is drawing a very clear sense of continuity between the OT and the NT. But, if a Jewish person learns that prophecies in their own Scriptures have been fulfilled by Jesus, I don't see how that sets them up for humiliation. I imagine that news would either be seen as compelling or flatly rejected, depending on how open their heart is to the Gospel. Either way, the fact that Christians believe this shows how interconnected the Hebrew Bible and the NT truly are! Rob
Rob, the potential humiliation occurs when a Christian is led to believe Matthew's "fulfill" indicates there was a predictive prophesy in the Tanakh that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene, or a predictive prophesy of the slaughter of infants in Bethlehem, or a predictive prophesy that Israel-meaning-Messiah would be called out of Egypt. Matthew is pointing out *in retrospect* the providential correspondence to establish patterns across generations. That is a very different concept from foretelling. You use examples of Matthew's "fulfill" with regard to the words of the Prophets to bolster the idea that "fulfill" with regard to the Law can somehow mean to retire it; the visionary prediction gives way to the historical reality. The problem is that even in regard to the words of the Prophets, that is not at all what he means. The Messiah's sojourn in Egypt did not undo r Exodus - neither the initial historical experience nor the covenant that came after. The mourning in Ramah didn't replace, relativize, transform or retire the experience of Jewish suffering around the capital. It was neither the first nor last instance of that pattern. The fact that Jesus was born in Bethlehem doesn't sunset the Branch-like destiny of the Messiah. Rather it initiates that destiny. What Matthew does with those early instances of fulfill is typology rather than prediction, and it is not the supersessionist brand of zero-sum typology where the purpose of the antitype is to obliterate the ekktype. More importantly, none of this supports the strange hypothesis that for Matthew, fulfilling commandments means retiring them.
In Hosea 11 Some try and say that the following is calling Jesus Israel BUT they miss the comma here. Jesus fulfilled the second half of this verse. The New Covenant is for 'the house of Israel' and 'The House ofJudah' (Jer. 31:31-33) and is still in the future. The Renewed covenant for us and beginning with Abe, who wasn't Jewish. (Gen. 15z;4-6/Ro.4:2,3ff/Gal.3:7ff)
Solberg: Not only because if it taught that, it would contradict many other parts of the NT, *If Christ were afraid of contradicting parts of the New Testament, he would have never rebuked Peter in Matthew 16 and warned him that he wasn’t savoring the things of God, but of men. Christ dares to contradict the New Testament-especially when New Testament individuals and authors say incorrect things. Case in point, Paul’s claiming in Ephesians 2:8-9 that man is saved by grace through faith and NOT OF WORKS. Christ comes back later to these same Ephesians in Revelation 2 and warns them to REPENT AND DO THE FIRST WORKS, else he would remove their candlestick, completely contradicting the advice Paul gave them. Why would Christ do that? Why not agree with what Paul said instead and tell them not to worry about works, because they are saved by grace like Paul was teaching the Ephesians? Because Paul was wrong. Also, it’s difficult to ignore the fact that even Paul didn’t have any problem contradicting Peter in Galatians 2, and even said he needed to do so because Peter needed to be blamed. So, anyone saying there are no contradictions in the New Testament are just reading the New Testament with their eyes closed and telling themselves fanciful lies to soothe their fragile inner child. But, I am a little shocked that a Professor with your level of experience suffers with this problem of accepting there are contradictions in the New Testament. I expect that from inexperienced amitures, but not a professor with any kind of professional standing. God could never correct mistakes if contradictions in the Bible are not allowed. For God to take a stance opposite of those he is correcting requires him to contradict people, Professor. That is basic logic, but Christians often don’t tend to have much respect for honesty and basic logic. It threatens their wrongful narritive that the Bible is free of any and all contradictions when God is actually contradicting the wrongful views of people all over the place. Do you think Christ agreed with everything the Jews were teaching or trying to trip him up with? Or, did he contradict their nonsense and expose the erroneous basis on which their misguided thinking resides? Every time Christ did that, he contradicted part of the New Testament in those instances too. So, you need a much better excuse and defense than you are leaning on above.
Solberg: He does the same thing with Isaiah 43, which is a prophecy about Israel’s Savior. Verses 18-19 say: “Remember not the former things, nor consider the things of old. Behold, I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert.”Matthew speaks directly to the Jewish expectation of God doing a new thing. *I think you misunderstand this prophecy, Professor. Early on Isaiah says the following which Christ says he was not able to do at his first coming in Matthew 23, but is what he suggests will happen later at his second coming in Matthew 24 in line with Deuteronomy 30 as well. Isa 43:4 - Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been honourable, and I have loved thee: therefore will I give men for thee, and people for thy life. Isa 43:5 - Fear not: for I am with thee: I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west; Isa 43:6 - I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth; Here is Christ admitting that did not happen at his first coming. Mat 23:37 - O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! But, instead, Christ says it will happen at his second coming. Mat 24:30 - And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. Mat 24:31 - And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. So, what Isaiah is talking about, when God does a new thing and why they will not remember the former things of old, is because at the second coming he will destroy the earth, moving every mountain and island out of its place in Revelation 6 in the sixth seal. And he will create a new heaven and new earth in Revelation 21:1. This is why Isaiah 66 comes back and reminds us of how God’s people will be brought to him again before heading into the New Earth in verses 22-23. So, Isaiah 43 is not a prophecy about what transpired at Christ’s first coming, but is concerning events related to his second coming. That is why it is unreliable to depend on the Jewish expectations. They were expecting Christ to come and overthrow their enemies too at his coming, but he didn’t meet that expectation of Micah 5’s prophecy either. Some prophecies speak to events around Christ’s first coming, some speak to the fulfillment of events between the first and second coming of Christ like in Matthew 24, and others are reserved to be fulfilled later at his second coming and beyond. And that is why Christians who try to usher in Jeremiah 31 at the first coming of Christ to introduce the New Covenant way too soon end up messing themselves up and getting things very wrong. And that is why you find yourself attacking what Christ says in Matthew 5:17-20, because you think Christ is trying to separate his people from their obligation to the Mosaic law, but he was doing the exact opposite.
The lawbreakers are those who are under the law which only Jesus could fully fulfill. So anyone claiming to be saved by the law is a liar. The saved are those who by faith believe that Jesus is the Messiah. If you do not accept Jesus as your Savior, since no one is saved by the law, you are headed to destruction.
@@georgehart8179 1 John 7..Little children, let no one deceive you, the one who PRACTICES RIGHTEOUSNESS is RIGHTEOUS…the one who PRACTICES sin is of the devil…Got Torah Got Truth
Jesus fulfilled the law by faith, and by his death changed the covenant to get rid of its ordinances, which ended with the destruction of the Temple in AD70.
Imagine you've been caught speeding and, according to the law, are required to pay the fine... Someone steps up and pays your fine, thus "fulfilling" the requirement of the law. Does this mean you can trot out of the courtroom and continue speeding? What's wrong with people? It's so simple: "Everyone doing sin also does Lawlessness, and sin is Lawlessness*." (1Jn 3:4) *transgression of the Law
@2besavedcom-7 I agree with you. Jesus fulfilled the law by faith not the letter, he sanctified himself. Jesus could not and did not pay for sins, he regained access to eternal life for everyone at the Cross, but only those in the covenant can be atoned fot their past sins at baptism. There was no atonement directly at the Cross. I have a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity' for NT truth
@@simonskinner1450yes there was atonement directly at the cross, and that for the whole world, but one cannot benefit from this atonement until the Spirit of God draws them to Christ. 1 John 2:2 (GB) And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.
Solberg: In fact, one of Matthew’s biggest goals in writing his gospel was to persuade his readers that Jesus is, in fact, the promised Jewish Messiah who has come to fulfill the prophecies foretold in the Hebrew Bible. He starts his book with that very claim. Chapter 1, verse 1: “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” He starts his book by linking Jesus all the way back to Abraham. The NT is not a new story, it’s a continuation of the same story of God that began in the Hebrew Bible. *So, why would you push so hard to separate Christians from that foundation by trying to get rid of the Mosaic law: a portion of the Hebrew Bible Christ quoted from considerably. I mean, take Christ’s three temptations in Matthew 4, for example. Christ’s defense in those three cases are taken from Deuteronomy 6 and 8, heavily depending on what was written by Moses to defend himself against Satan’s advancements. If you detach Christians from the Old Covenant and law and the gospel from that law as well, you destroy the foundation on which Christ based his defense against Lucifer. So, if the NT is a continuation of the Hebrew Bible, and the gospel depends on referencing the Mosaic law,then trying to use the NT to create a wedge between the gospel and the Mosaic law would only harm the gospel. And this is another reason why Christ in the gospels does not instruct people to stop circumcising or to abandon the Mosaic law. Christ knows that would harm the gospel, even if you don’t yet grasp that, Professor.* Solberg: And remember that the English word “Christ” essentially Means Messiah.” So, in the first verse of his gospel, which is also the first verse of the NT, Matthew tells us that Jesus is the very Christ, the Messiah, who was prophesied to come from the kingly line of David, and is the seed of Abraham. He's telling his Jewish readers, this is your story. And he goes on to highlight the theme of fulfillment at every turn. There are ten passages in Matthew where he formally points his readers directly to the fulfillment of the OT. And there are nine other passages that informally speak of the fulfillment of OT prophecy. And that’s an important piece of context for us to keep in mind when we get to our fulfillment passage in Matthew 5. Because that passage is part of Matthew’s overall mission to communicate Christ’s fulfillment of the messianic promises and prophecies. *But, what about the parts Christ said he was not able to fulfill, but would be fulfilled in the future? Christ in Matthew 23 admits openly he was not able to gather the people in fulfillment of the promise in Deuteronomy 30, but comes back in Matthew 24, admitting that that part of the law would not be fulfilled until the blowing of the trumpet at Christ’s second coming instead, when his angels gather his people from the ends of heaven? Then we can start talking about how his people will be gathered back into their own land to further fulfill Deuteronomy 30’s prophetic aims in line with Ezekiel 36 which speaks of the same thing. And how god will circumcise their heart in Deuteronomy 30 and Ezekiel 44 and remove their stony heart to give them a new heart in Ezekiel 36, again well into our future. Suggesting man still has a stony heart and isn’t quite under the New Covenant yet, because he doesn’t even have a new heart yet to prepare him to be under that future covenant. You see, the Mosaic law remains quite relevant until well after Christ’s second coming, Professor. And that is the part you are missing in all of this as you seek to teach people to separate themselves from the Mosaic law which is still quite relevant and still being fulfilled . This is why Christ never claims that you are no longer under the Mosaic law, because Christ is fully aware it is still in effect well into our future.
Solberg: And, in addition to explicit prophetic fulfillment, Matthew also often teaches the fulfillment of the OT through typology, which is when the biblical authors interpret OT events and people and institutions as “types” that foreshadow things in the NT. And some of these are easy to miss from our modern perspective. For example, Matthew portrays Jesus as a new Moses through a sort of indirect presentation that would have been much more obvious to his first-century Jewish readers because they were waiting on the Messiah. So he taps into imagery and language from passages like Deuteronomy 18 where Moses prophesied: “The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him…I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their fellow Israelites, and I will put my words in his mouth. He will tell them everything I command him. I myself will call to account anyone who does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name.” Matthew’s first-century Jewish readers understood this as a prophecy about the Messiah. This is the messianic figure that they were anticipating and waiting for. *But, this is precisely why none of Christ’s true followers will seek to release themselves from the authority of the Mosaic law, because this portion of the Mosaic law is the foundation on which the gospel itself rests and gains all its authority. When you say silly things like, “Christians are no longer bound to the Old Covenant and law of Moses”, you are trying to destroy the authority on which the above Mosaic law’s directive binds us to the authority and words of Christ as given to him by his Father. You are telling Christians that they are not obligated to obey Christ when you do that whether you realize it or not. You are separating them from the above directive God gave concerning Christ. You are wrong for doing that, Professor. Completely wrong! You are tampering with a foundation you do not well understand. What god says above makes the gospel itself an extention of the Mosaic law. And those who realize that can better understand why those who get the victory over the beast and his image in Revelation 15 stand on the sea of glass and sing the song of Moses and the Lamb: the two prophets of Deuteronomy 18-both of which whose teachings are still quite relevant and still being fulfilled.
The gospel is not trying to detach us from the law of Moses, it is trying to draw us to the law of Moses so that we will have the protection we need when the beast and its image starts imposing the mark in the right hand and foreheads of those who do not heed the third angel’s message of Revelation 14. God is attempting in fulfillment of Isaiah 8:16 to bind up the testimony to the right hand of his people, and seal the law in the forheads of his disciples. Which is why four verses later, God says those who speak contrary to the law and testimony have no light in them and then continues through verse 22 to explain how they will curse God and king and be driven to darkness. They are not sealed like Christ and his most diligent followers are. Because laws like Deuteronomy 6 instruct God’s people to bind his commandments and law to their right hand and forehead in anticipation of what is coming in Revelation 14. Why do you think the beast is trying to replace that specific law of Moses with the mark of the beast instead, Professor? Do you think that is just a random coincidence? Check out Revelation 14:12, because those who are identified as God’s people keep the commandments of God and also have the faith of Jesus (again the combination of the teachings from Moses and the Lamb): the song sung by those who get the victory during this time and end up safely on the sea of glass. Stop attacking the relationship between God’s people and the Mosaic law, Professor. You are trying to harm and get innocent people killed when you do that. You are not helping things here but doing a lot of needless damage. I wish I could say your teachings are simply misguided, but your attack on the Mosaic law is so intentional that it is like you are trying to cause people to mess up purposely. Lucifer is waging war on the remnant in Revelation 12:17: those who keep the commandments of God (the writings of Moses) and the testimony of Jesus (the gospel of the Lamb). The signature of Moses and the Lamb is purposely hidden throughout the book of Revelation to help God’s people know that their pastors and teachers who have been speaking against Moses are simplyworking on Lucifer’s side of the war effort, not helping God’s people to properly navigate this dangerous time of end time Bible prophecy.
@@nicoarnold2200 @nicoarnold2200 1 hour ago Did you even watch the video? *I sit through a lot of his videos, some more than others, but I tend to prefer to sit down and read the transcript of his videos. I get to reason through his arguments far more carefully when doing that, and I quote his own words when responding to him to boot.
We should not confuse the law. Clarify the people what law Jesus was talking about. DO NOT STEAL IS A LAW IR NOT? IT IS. AS A CHRISTIAN I CAN NOW BREAK ANY COMMANDMENT UNDER THE PRETEXT THAT I DO NOT LIVE UNDER THE LAW. AS PREACHERS WE SHOULD LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT THE LAW JESUS TOOK OUT WAS THE CERIMONIAL LAW. THE MATRIMONIAL LAW AND THE MORAL LAW REMAIN INTACT AND ALL FOLLOWER'S OF JESUS ARE UNDER THE MORAL AND MATRIMONIAL LAWS. THAT WHY JESUS SAID NO TO DIVORCE. JESUS ABOLISHES THE SABBATH LAW. WE MUST BE SPECIFIC ON WHAT JESUS ABOLISHED AND WHAT HE DID NOT ABOLISH.
Because Yeshua is eternal, He kept the law perfectly (He fulfilled it) And since he lives forever, He will live longer than heaven and earth passing away. Therefore no jot, no tittle will pass from the law. Ever. Because he is eternal. And his righteousness becomes our righteousness. : )
You're saying there has been no change at all, not even down to the jot and tittle. So, are we still required to sacrifice animals to atone for our sin? Rob
Solberg: Grant Osborne writes this, “Matthew sees all three sections of the Old Testament-the Law, the Writings, and the Prophets-fulfilled in Jesus. He has completed their expectations and fully interpreted their meaning.” *The problem with Grant Osborn is that he is sadly wrong! Christ himself says Grant Osborn was wrong the moment Christ admits he could not gather the people in Matthew 23 back at his first coming to fulfill that prophetic portion of Deuteronomy 30. And Christ further proves Grant to be wrong by placing the gathering of Deuteronomy 30 well into our future at the blowing of the trumpet at Christ’s second coming in Matthew 24. And how could Christ fulfill all the expectations of the prophecies of the Old Testament when prophecies like Isaiah 63 concern what Christ will do at his second coming. Christ never came with died garments from Bozrah from treading the winefat. Even John after the cross places that into our future. Rev 19:15 - And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. When is the heaven rolled up like a scroll from Isaiah 34? John in the sixth seal of Revelation 6 says that is taking place at Christ’s second coming too. Isaiah 65 and 66 speak of the New heaven and New Earth. That didn’t come into being at Christ’s first coming. Christ came back to John in Revelation 21:1 and showed him that was well into our future as well. So, Grant Osborn has a nice sounding theory, but it is pattently wrong. What Christ fulfilled back at his first coming were all the particulars concerning his first coming from the law and prophets, not the details concerning his second coming like in Isaiah 59 when Christ returns to the earth at the end of that chapter of prophecy too. The problem is that Grant Osborn doesn’t know prophecy very well if he is making silly assertions like he made above. Sorry, but he is just wrong. There is no easy way to say it but to say it like it truly is, Professor.
Hi Corey. Osbourne's comment was actually made in the context of the earthly ministry of Christ. And if you listen carefully to this video, I did not say Jesus fulfilled *_all_* the messianic prophecies. I said I take His statement "all is accomplished" as referring to the prophecies about His earthly ministry. And He fulfilled hundreds of those prophecies. A bigger concern I want to share with you is your pervasive attempts to scour our videos for every "iota and dot" you disagree with. First of all, thank you for spending so much time pouring over my teachings! To set your expectations properly, I am far from perfect and don't know everything. So I'm sure you'll find some errors and misstatements and such. And I'm always grateful for correction when I get things wrong. More importantly, I'm concerned you're missing the forest for the trees. It's obvious from your numerous long posts that you approach my teachings in a spirit of divisiveness, dissension, and criticism rather than openly and charitably. It's certainly your right to approach them that way, but I think you're missing a really good opportunity to learn and grow as a believer. I'm not suggesting you have to agree with everything I say. (I certainly don't agree with everything I hear or read from other teachers!) But it seems to me your caustic approach may be robbing you of some benefit. Also, I've mentioned this before, but I don't have time to read comments of more than about 250 words. Which means I end up skipping past most of your long diatribes. Blessings, Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots @TheBiblicalRoots 3 hours ago Hi Corey. Osbourne's comment was actually made in the context of the earthly ministry of Christ. *Insisting that to be the case only reinforces why his opening claim is pattently incorrect, Professor. Here, let’s consider what he actually said. “Grant Osborne writes this, “Matthew sees all three sections of the Old Testament-the Law, the Writings, and the Prophets-fulfilled in Jesus.” If that all encompassing statement by Grant were an accurate claim, I wouldn’t have been able to find a single issue that lacked fulfillment in any of the above stated sections of the Old Testament, because all three of those sections of the Old Testament would have been fulfilled in Jesus as the above claim sets forth. But, I demonstrated multiple counter examples to that faulty claim, and there are a lot more where those came from to boot. It helps to understand that not all prophetic fulfillments depend solely on what Christ does, because Christ isn’t the only focus of fulfilled prophecy. He may be an important focus, andmay even be the most important focus of numerous prophecies, but there are many prophecies that are about things other than Christ. And so, the overzealous claims of many theologians tends to be nauseating when they blow things so completely far out of proportion that they miss the point and mislead others along the way. Many prophecies are fulfilled in what other people do too. Christ is not the depiction of Lucifer in Zechariah 3. Christ is not the statue of Daniel 2. Christ is not the four beasts of Daniel 7, nor the little horn of Daniel 7:25, Christ is not the strangers of Isaiah 56, Christ is not the lion of Joel 1, nor is he the four insects in that chapter either. So, to expect that all three sections of the Old Testament mentioned above would be fulfilled in Jesus is an unrealistic expectation to begin with designed to distort the very purpose and meaning of numerous prophecies. Grant continued: “He has completed their expectations…” How can that be when many prophecies from the earlier three sections of the Old Testament are not even fulfilled yet? This latter idea is a victim of Grant’s former faulty claim. And I know why Grant and others talk like this, because they worry that if they give the impression that something-especially as it concerns the Mosaic law-was not fulfilled back on the cross, then that will give folks like the Hebrew Roots fuel to say that the Mosaic law is still in effect until all is fulfilled as Christ’s words in Matthew 5:18 declare. You can haggle over what you hope those words mean in Matthew 5:18, but that doesn’t mean they will agree with your interpretation of those words. And that makes it all the more dangerous to let unfulfilled portions of the law reach beyond the cross, because I can see from the sheer number of videos you have putout through the life of your channel how much of an investment you have undertaken to attempt to separate the Hebrew Roots from the Mosaic law. It’s not as easy as you thought it would be, is it Professor? Grant: “…and fully interpreted their meaning.” *And where did Christ fully interpret the meaning of all three sections of the law, writings and prophets he supposedly fulfilled from Grant’s original claim? Seeing this was isolated to the perspective of Matthew, we would either have to believe Matthew 28 is missing numerous chapters of explanations from Christ on such matters, or that Grant is flying by the seat of his pants here hoping no one is paying attention to the exaggerated nature of his claims above.* Solberg: And if you listen carefully to this video, I did not say Jesus fulfilled all the messianic prophecies. I said I take His statement "all is accomplished" as referring to the prophecies about His earthly ministry. And He fulfilled hundreds of those prophecies. *I think you may have read more into my response to Grant’s quote there than was actually there. I was directing my comments to what Grant was claiming in that response, not necessarily to how your view may agree or differ from what Grant was claiming.* Solberg: A bigger concern I want to share with you is your pervasive attempts to scour our videos for every "iota and dot" you disagree with. First of all, thank you for spending so much time pouring over my teachings! To set your expectations properly, I am far from perfect and don't know everything. So I'm sure you'll find some errors and misstatements and such. And I'm always grateful for correction when I get things wrong *Well, I don’t just pour over your videos, I actually sit down and read your transcripts. I take considerable time to try and appreciate what it is you are saying and what it is you hope to achieve in all of this. And when it comes to being pervasive with your own comments, you have exhibited that tendency with the abundance of directed videos criticizing those in the Hebrew Roots movement. So, fair is fair, right? If you can’t take a little combing criticism, maybe this isn’t the work for you. But, if you are going to invest this much time and effort into isolating and criticizing a specific group of believers for what they believe and pointing out why you think they are in the wrong, don’t be surprised if others do the same with the things you share with the public-especially when people think that what you believe is not on target. Because the number of videos you have created to address and attack the foundation of the Hebrew Roots movement could easily be construed as an assault, if not a crusade of some kind. And that is especially the case when people imagine you to be abusing or even twisting the meaning of Scripture to achieve certain outcomes. I know you may not see it that way, but that doesn’t mean they don’t see it that way, Professor. And you have been at this for a long time targeting this group, but you find my few critical comments to your presentations to be disturbing in comparison? I think there is an old saying that goes something like, “People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”* Solberg: More importantly, I'm concerned you're missing the forest for the trees. It's obvious from your numerous long posts *Hey, have you seen the length of some of your own videos and their associated transcripts? Just saying!* Solberg: that you approach my teachings in a spirit of divisiveness, dissension, and criticism rather than openly and charitably. *That’s rich coming from the very man who waged a multi-year campaign of videos dedicated to uprooting and dismantling the Hebrew Roots community and what they believe. Now you want to play the victim? LOL! Are you trying to make me laugh here, or what exactly?* Solberg: It's certainly your right to approach them that way, but I think you're missing a really good opportunity to learn and grow as a believer. *By studying and questioning you and your beliefs just like you are doing to the Hebrew Roots? LOL! Professor, you drug me out here into the weeds, because you didn’t have a good strategy in hand to face me on the issues. If you think that isn’t exceedingly clear to me at this point, then you have underestimated me far more than you realize.* Solberg: I'm not suggesting you have to agree with everything I say. (I certainly don't agree with everything I hear or read from other teachers!) But it seems to me your caustic approach may be robbing you of some benefit. *What robs me of benefit, Professor, is when I send you good questions that you actually need to honestly address, and instead you pull crap like this, ignoring my concerns like the plague. What that tells me is that you are not serious and not prepared to handle your view being challenged.* Solberg: Also, I've mentioned this before, but I don't have time to read comments of more than about 250 words. *But, you have all kinds of time to ignore my questions and concerns, drag me out here in the weeds, get yourself in way over your head, pretending you have the skill to psycholanalyze me for lack of any real strategy? This was a failed plan of your’s too, Professor. That should tell you something about your own approach that needs serious work. LOL! Let me help you to save yourself tons of time. The weeds is not where you want to take people when you value your time, Professor. This time could have been better spent discussing quality ideas, but that was never your intention, was it? Do you begin to understand how disingenuous your statement is above once that cat is out of the bag?* Solberg: Which means I end up skipping past most of your long diatribes. *I know you do! It’s because you want to spend far more time with posts like this, dragging us away from the issues of importance, so you can try to show me how skilled you are at getting in way over your head out here in the weeds over nothing of any real value or consequence.
(I know it’s a study but) You explained your preferred use of “fulfilled” for prophesies but not for the law.. You can’t bring a law to its completion by doing it.. I can’t show love to you and then BAM that law is completed, and I don’t have to worry about Showing love anymore… not biblical Paul (Romans 13:8-9) taught how to fulfill laws dealing with others.. In 1 Corinthians 7, he also taught how to obey Torah laws about marriage… So if Paul taught how to follow torah Then is must have not come to a completion as you think.. And if prophesies tells us we’re doing sacrifices in the kingdom… Again the law must have not been completed as you think. BUT Another definition (that actually gels with the passage) for fulfill is to fully preach/teach and thats exactly what Christ did. He says those who >>teach
I hear you, F1S. And I agree that a law cannot be "fulfilled" in the sense of being "brought to completion." As I said in this video, in Matt. 5:18, I don't believe Jesus is making a legal statement about the old covenant commandments, per se. He’s speaking about the fulfillment of OT messianic prophecies and "types." And in fulfilling the things in the OT that pointed to Him-for example, the blood sacrifices required for sin atonement-He brought them to an end. And that includes many old covenant laws. We provided many Scriptural examples of this in the video. "The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming-not the realities themselves" (Heb. 10:1) Shalom! Rob
@ ahh ok, something to think about, shadows always point to the “object” it derived from. Like the passover… it points BACK to Christ… Also, the blood of bulls and goats never took away sins and made us prefect, it only pointed to Christ… with this understanding, prophecies about sacrifices, in the kingdom makes more sense biblically.
Tectonics I did watch the video. My understanding of the Bible is so simple . Prov 28 :13 says he that caovereth his sins shake not prosper ( eternally) BUT HE THAT CONFESSES AND FORSAKES his sin( disobedience to God) will.have mercy or forgiveness. What the good Dr is doing is makting the Bible contradict itself . By twisting the Bible to NOT obey God and reject His law Because Christ came to fulfil it ( obey it not destroy it) is not what Paul or any of the Apostles wrote . Paul said he established the law . John said we are liars if we say we know God and don't keep His commands . Peter said we are like pigs if we turn from the Holy commandment after having recieved and are back in the pig manure of sin after Jesus has washed and cleansed us from all our unrighteousness and it would be better for us not to have known the path of righteousness . All that was said contradicts all these Biblw writers . Saul was the king of excuses for NOT obeying God and God took the kingdom off him . There are lessons here for us .. obedience is the condition for Jesus to give back eternal life that was lost through disobedience Gen 2:16 ,17 Rev 22: 14. People are making excuses to die eternally Rom 6;23 CRAZY!!!!!
Tektronics . Jesus said we must become as little children. If a child could understand all this theological gymnastics yhen no one would be entering heaven . Jesus has graciously asked us to keep His commands and HIS WORDS John 14: 15 , 23, 24.. This is what a child can understand otherwise only Drs of Divinity would be saved .conjecture or surmising won't save anyone . Good scholars have already translated the Bible . I just read and heed what it tells me to do for my eternal.salvation . This is not hard to understand
@@EricHort-cx1jp You're SDA, so your understanding of the Gospel is NOT simple & involves the Great Controversy, the 3 Angels Message, the 7-step Sanctuary System, the Investigative Judgment & Sinless Perfectionism.
The eternal.law in brief is NOT to be nasty mean and unkind to our nieghbores and obedient to our Creator . WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT??? A sinner cannot keep a holy law so God helps out by creating in us a new heart Ezek 36: 24- 27 , we are connected to the True Vine and bear HID FRUIT NOT OURS .and are partakers of the divine nature to escape the corruptions that are in the world . When Jesus is living in us Gal 2:20 we abhor our past sins . If there is no abhorance for sin Jesus is NOT living IN us . Sin is and always will.ne transgression of the moral.law the law we will all be judged by . No where in the Bible is there an excuse for deliberate wilful sinning . Quite the opposite Heb 10: 26, 27. Even though we are born sinners it does not give us the right or 3xcuse for sinning. 1Pet 2: 11 says to ABSTAIN from sin through the power and grace of Jesus who died to save us from it . Jesus died in vain if we keep on sinning and it will incur the indignation and wrath of God against sin Gal 3: 13 Rev 14: 10 . God has a right to be indignant with anyone who thinks Jesus (His Son) died to make excuses for sin amd sanction our rebellion against Gods kingdom ..Jesus died for nothing and may as well have stayed in heaven and left us to our fate
I think his 'literal' interpretation of 'heaven and earth' passing away as a future eschatological event referring to the physical earth and, a what, I don't know, heaven, is erroneous. Heaven and earth passing, being shaken, burned or rolled up was biblical language often used to describe the destruction of a socio-political or governmental system during the ruin of its city or nation. Israel's heaven and earth was the Law. What 5:18 is saying is that the Law and its temple cultus stands until all OT prophecy is fulfilled. When is that? All prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70, "For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." Luke 21:22
Thanks, Mr. Murfle! I get what you're saying and I largely agree with you. However, I did want to point out that there are still OT prophecies yet to be fulfilled. For example those about the second coming of the Messiah, complete global peace, etc. Blessings, Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots For starters, when did Jesus say He would return? Answer: In His generation (Mt 24:34) and in the lifetime of some standing there with Him (Mt 16:28). Put together with other biblical data, that makes AD70 extremely compelling.
@@salpezzino7803 The threefold division isn't a doctrine error because it's not in scripture but comes out of systematic theology. Jesus, Paul etc. all referred to The Law, or The Law and the Prophets or Law , Prophets and writings. They don't make a distinction between ceremonial, civil and moral. They're all God's Law and Israel had a moral obligation being under that covenant to keep all of them.
@@Kenn-rb7gq Romans 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them Romans 1:21 Paul says that people knew God exists but refused to worship him, which teaches that the worship of God is a moral imperative
@@salpezzino7803 No I'm definitely not in that cult ... I'm in loose agreement with most of New Covenant Theology though. If I had to put myself in a theological camp that would be it..
Dear Professor Solberg. If what you say were true, Jesus would have violated the Torah: Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Matthew responds to accusations of his time that claim Jesus taught apostasy, that Jews should not keep the Torah. Luke also addressed it in the book of Acts where Paul had to defend himself against the same accusation that he teaches Jews not to circumcise their children. The statement of Matthew 5:17 follows the beatitudes which to some might have sounded that he is abolishing the law. He also had many run-ins with the Pharisees which some might have viewed as him opposing them with new ideas about the Torah. Jesus had to clarify that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfil it. Now your claim that Matthew uses the word pleroo, fulfilment, as fulfilling or bringing something to an end is true in many passages. Yet it lacks the reference to what it is actually fulfilling. He doesn’t point to a specific scripture like he does in the other passages. And if you say it being a general reference to all the scriptures, you have a problem, because so far apart from maybe Isaiah 53, there’s no messianic prophecy fulfilled. That’s why Christians believe in a second coming. So even if your reading were true, since Jesus hasn’t fulfilled all the prophetic prophecies yet concerning the messiah the law of Moses still stands and must be obeyed. Sorry, check mate 😜
Hi RL. Deut. 4:2 is a command for the Israelites, not for God. Jesus added many new things to the Torah (e.g. Matt. 28:19-20), which He can do because He is God. But even if Jesus spoke those words as a mere human, how does saying He "did not come to abolish the law but fulfill it" violate Deut. 4:2? It doesn't. Also, if you listen carefully, I never said Jesus fulfilled *_all_* the messianic prophecies. I said he was referring to the prophecies about His earthly ministry, and He fulfilled hundreds of those prophecies: www.newtestamentchristians.com/bible-study-resources/351-old-testament-prophecies-fulfilled-in-jesus-christ/ Best, RL
@@TheBiblicalRoots I did not say Jesus violated the Torah by saying he fulfilled it. Jews say they fulfil the Torah, they don’t mean that they fulfil prophecies but that they keep the commandments of Moses. I’m not quite sure what hundreds of prophecies you refer to in the TeNaCh Jesus fulfilled. There are only a very few one can refer to Jesus like those of the suffering servant. I agree yet I also agree with the Jews who say the suffering servant refers to Israel. As king of the Jews Jesus represented Israel. Concerning Matthew 28:19-20 I fail to see how they are new commandments. He’s not adding to the Torah nor diminishing it. What Jesus does is giving a personal instruction on how to share the Torah with the rest of the world. Now the Torah applies different for gentiles than Jews, yet every iota and tittle must be taught and applied. This is what Jesus commanded.
@@TheBiblicalRoots and concerning your link, I really can’t take it serious. I would have expected better from you. It’s a silly list that desperately tries to read things into the TeNaCh that isn’t actually there. Nearly all of those so called prophecies can be easily refuted and have already been done so by many. I do believe that Jesus was anointed to be the next king of Israel, the messiah, and that he was rejected and crucified. I also believe that he rose again, although scripture is unclear how exactly this happened since Paul didn’t believe in a physical resurrection and his letters precede the gospels. Jesus actually refers to something completely different. He says that Moses wrote about him yet there is not a single reference in Moses about a virgin birth, about the seed of David, about the anointed one being rejected, being crucified and resurrected after three days. So what exactly did Jesus mean? Only Paul makes a clear association with Jesus and Adam, Jesus being the second Adam. Yet Paul makes statements that don’t add up, like pointing to seed being singular, when it actually isn’t, referring to Abraham’s offspring: Galatians 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. This makes no sense as seed in Hebrew is singular and plural the same word. This is just one example of the many mischiefs being perpetrated against the TeNaCh, making it say things it actually doesn’t say.
A few things. 1. Jeff Benner teaches that the law is still in effect. 2. Some of the prophecies were also fulfilled in the time of the prophets or near that time frame, so I don't find the fulfilled argument that convincing. 3. The most convincing parts are from Paul's writings. I have been looking at the website "Jesus Words Only" and while I don't agree with his Unitarian ideas, he has me pretty convinced that Paul is a false apostle, so I don't find the Pauline arguments that strong. Likewise, Jeff Benner also uses Paul to explain how Paul is still upholding the law. IMO Paul seems to say contradicting things to even himself. So I think it would be most convincing the hear Jesus explain how he got rid of the law. It doesn't seem the be the understanding of the apostles at all when they are mentioned in Acts. Near the end of Acts, they make Paul basically swear that he still upholds the law and he does so. So it seems like everyone understood that the law was still in effect. Again, people like Jeff Benner actually go through Paul's letters to explain how they still keep the law in effect and that Paul is essentially arguing that the law is not a salvation issue. tbh I'm not 100% following the not bring peace, but a sword = the law is abolished. Jesus didn't come to bring peace, but he gave it to the disciples and those who believe, but everyone else got a sword and even the disciples were split apart from other people who rejected Jesus. So I just don't see how we say "yes Jesus did come to bring peace" Jesus will bring peace on earth -- just like the heavens and the earth will pass away. Jesus' context in that situation is that he is sending out the disciples and that they will be rejected in different towns and he is telling them that it is ok. That they aren't to disbelieve Jesus because Jesus didn't come to be accepted by everyone, but that he is going to be divisive. So the implication of the context is immediately true. Just like Jesus says that he didn't come to abolish the law, but fulfill it and then immediately taught the law and how it should be interpreted: with righteousness exceeding the pharisees -- because the pharisees were not righteous, but only externally righteous (while dead on the inside) and had false teachings like everyone who is an Israelite will be saved or that you can't heal someone on the sabbath. They didn't know God or the law and they were workers of lawlessness. As I see it, the law still stands, but we are not saved by it, but we should be obedient to it. As most of us are gentiles, we are not called to follow many things, but we should still look to it and there is a lot of understanding on how to obey the two greatest commandments by looking at the spirit of the other commandments even if we aren't under most of them. And I'd add that I would love to live under a nation that follow the law. I find Paul's arguments against the law stupid. The law was given by angels? So that means that we don't follow it anymore? That doesn't agree with the Bible, but even if it did, that still doesn't make any sense why it would be abolished. I would really appreciate you debating with "Jesus Words Only" because I have been listening to that website/channel and I am finding it more and more convincing.
"As I see it" BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
Hi, Purple. 1. I didn’t quote Brenner regarding the law. 2. I was speaking specifically of messianic prophecies. None of those prophecies were fulfilled until Jesus. 3. Jesus said this about the Apostle Paul: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15). And Jesus said, “Whoever receives the one I send receives me” (John 13:20). So, to reject Paul is to reject Jesus who sent him. -Rob
You have followers because people prefer the LIES of deception. Isa 30:9. In Mt.5:19 Christ implores us to DO rather than BREAK His commandments. Saints are the heaven bound Christians who KEEP the COMMANDMENTS of God. Rev.14:12. 22:14. KJV. That's why the law is written in our hearts. Heb. 10:16. Jer.31:31-33. Ez.36:26-27. The law is the transcript of the character of God, how could you abolish it. without eliminating Him in our hearts. How could we obey God away from keeping the law of salvation. Heb.5:9 . With grace we are NO longer UNDER THE LAw means grace has enabled us to be AT PAR or EQUAL with the law. Gal 5:18. This means the Spirit of grace enables us to be as spiritual as the law so that we could keep it. Rom.7:14; 8:1-7.
I take it you're SDA? You do know most people are unfamiliar with the "Great Controversy" whereby Christians are tasked with vindicating the character of God against the accusations of Satan, because it's not in the Bible, but rather was lifted from John Milton's "Paradise Lost"?
The Law Fulfilled: A Study of Matthew 5:17-20 Just 30 seconds into this video you state that the standard Hebrew Roots understanding of this passage would contradict many other parts of the New Testament. The fact is it doesn’t, it simply contradicts your interpretation of those New Testament passages, Which by the way contradicts the entirety of scripture, to be fair. Yes Jesus is the promised Prophet from Deut. 18, however your belief about him causes your personal Jesus to qualify as the false Prophet of Deut. 13, you can’t have it both ways. Jesus is the Prophet like unto Moses just like the time Moses told everyone they don’t need to keep all the Commands of God… wait that never happened… The entire unleavened law of God came through Moses. Yep and as soon as he called them out of Egypt he delivered to them his Law, Just like in Luke 2 when Jesus was 12 after himself coming out from Egypt. The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel is the Northern 10 tribes of Israel. Matt 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Lost by divorce and exile, brought near again by the death of the husband articulated by Paul in Romans 7. His ministry didn’t expand, Lost Israelites were already in every nation around the world Deut. 28:64 and Jesus taught them to teach all nations all things whatsoever he commanded them, which is all the Commands of God, which again if it were anything else he would be the false prophet of Deut. 13. If Matthew’s writing this under the influence of the Holy Spirit, it’s not just some amalgamation of what Matthew thinks is important. Ok so if it seems like Jesus is saying the Law will not pass away ‘till, that’s because this was written for Jewish eyes only… yeah no, God’s not racist, everyone gets the same penny. You say Matthew 5:17 is stand alone and can’t be compared with other scripture, but somehow, you’re confident to say Jesus is referring to specific passages from the Law and Prophets concerning “Messianic prophecies” and not the entirety of the Law and Prophets. Let’s look at that… Oh we can’t take anything Jesus said literally when it seems like he’s suggesting we should keep the entire Law until the earth blows up… Actually no eyeball or hand or anything in this life is worth the Kingdom, yeah cut it off, it really is that important literally!!! Why don’t you think Jesus will give you what you ask for? Oh I think I know why, here let’s read what Jesus said rather than arrogantly denying his word. John 14: 14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. 15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. There it is, You don’t want to keep his commandments, you don’t want him to do what you ask. The machine isn’t broken, you have to plug it in. You will get your candy, but you have to put in your quarter. Stop thinking God is all things unconditional, And Jesus wasn’t serious because you can’t read or follow simple instructions! That whole last little bit you said trying to establish doubt was borderline blasphemy. So let’s say you’re right 17 is talking exclusively about specific Messianic prophecies, and 18 is referencing those prophecies, then in 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. So whosoever denies the death, burial, and resurrection is getting into the Kingdom, but they’re called least, but they get in, but they deny Jesus, but they get in, but without faith no one can be saved, but they got in… You see, going back to your first assumption is he talking about The entirety of the Law and Prophets, or exclusively specific messianic prophecies. One way all followers of Jesus are expected to keep the entire law, the other has people in the kingdom who deny the blood of Christ. As I said at the beginning of my comment: the standard Hebrew Roots understanding of this passage would contradict many other parts of the New Testament. The fact is it doesn’t, it simply contradicts your interpretation of those New Testament passages, Which by the way contradicts the entirety of scripture, to be fair. Came not to bring peace, but a sword. Jesus is speaking of himself, who he is, what he stood for, what he taught, the plumbline that he set down. Everyone will find themselves on one side or the other concerning him. Jesus is not willing to compromise truth for the sake of unity. The few, and the many. I am only contradicting your misunderstanding of Pauls words, you’re contradicting the entirety of scripture. A change in the Law is not equal to something passing/removed from the law. Jesus is the priest, Jesus blood is the sacrifice, I am the Temple of God, the Spirit dwells within me. The one thing you always point to is in full effect. Is your testimony that Jesus is not your high priest, his blood is not a sufficient sacrifice, the Holy Spirit does not dwell within you, you are not the Temple of God??? Your Testimony is the most important thing you got, you will be judged based on it, and Satan is a crafty prosecuting attorney. Useless because God is no longer accepting animal sacrifice, in fact it’s an insult and denial of the deity of Jesus Christ. After the resurrection of Jesus the ongoing continuation of animal sacrifices is referred to by Daniel as “the overspreading of abominations” animal sacrifices now are an abomination because they are a direct denial of Jesus. If I deny the validity of the one Torah portion that Jesus uses to forgive me of my inevitable ongoing sins and failures, I don’t believe he’s obligated to extend forgiveness to me. Let no man judge you, but the body of Christ (the church) Under the law means in debt to the law. Paul had no debt to the Law, he was forgiven his sins by the blood of Jesus, simply making himself relatable. Paul also says “unto the Jews I became a Jew) he was a Jew! Sometimes I think you misunderstand Paul on purpose. Paul was speaking of people who were of the circumcision party who thought circumcision was the most important thing and you didn’t need anything else. Acts 15 is not an exhaustive list, the real question is why was there any list at all, if the Torah is done away with… and those were gentiles! Ephesians 2:15 ordinances is the G1378 Dogma you know that, why are you still trying to trick anyone??? In debt to the Guardian, Jesus forgives us. Romans 7 Law of husband, law of divorce and remarriage… Why when the Bible speaks of the entire Law you want to make it about a specific law? But when it talks a specific law you want to make it about the entire Law??? Led by the Spirit you will not sin, therefore have no debt to the law. Can’t be harmonized??? You have Jesus deniers in the Kingdom of Heaven!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Peace
Thanks Minnesota! You helped to prove my point by elucidating exactly the kind of careless, flawed, dangerous, and unbiblical “Torah-keeping” theology I was referring to in this video. Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots I know you are, but what am I? Rather than a feeble attempt at discrediting me or my argument, try explaining why your belief system causes you to teach all these fine people how those who deny the blood of Christ find themselves in the Kingdom of God. Just back up and take another run at it :) Peace
Defending biblical roots seriously? Respectfully, you should first know the scriptures before you mention fulfilling the law which is a ridiculous claim and very contradictory statement. What about Ezekiel 37??
Wow, there so many errors and problems with this horrible explanation it's hard to even know where to start. 1st- Nowhere in the OT is the torah ever described as being temporary or having a designed end. It's ALWAYS described as "eternal", "everlasting", "for ALL generations", "the Levites shall ***NEVER**** lack a man in my presence to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings, and to make sacrifices ****forever****.” This list could go on and on. And PS, let's nip this in the bud, Jesus was NOT a Levite, so don't get that twisted. 2nd- Only Jews have to follow the Torah!!! Gentiles never had to follow the Torah, which is why in ACTS 15 the huge debate WAS NOT IF THE JEWS SHOULD BE FOLLOWING THE TORAH, but if the ****GENTILES**** had to follow the Torah. This is huge!!!! 3rd- if the interpretation of Jesus in Matthew is that the law was done and fulfilled at his death, than why the heck would the disciples, who were with him constantly for 3 years and who were supposed to have the Holy Spirit guiding them into all truth, ARGUING IN ACTS 15 ABOUT WHETHER THE ****GENTILES**** HAD TO KEEP THE LAW! It's obvious that the early Jewish church in Jerusalem was Torah observant and the problem was not whether Jews had to continue observing the law, but whether gentiles had to. And the Jerusalem council didn't even say NO to keeping the law, they STILL MADE even the gentiles keep SOME of the law, which again flies in the face of the claim that the law was done away with at the end of Jesus' life.
Thanks Jeremy. 1.) God always knew that the Israelites would not keep His law and would break His covenant. "And the Lord said to Moses: 'You are going to rest with your ancestors, and these people will soon prostitute themselves to the foreign gods of the land they are entering. They will forsake me and break the covenant I made with them.'" (Deut. 31:16) Also, the Torah says, “This shall be a statute *_forever_* for you, that atonement may be made for the people of Israel once in the year because of all their sins” (Lev 16:34). But the NT later says “There is no longer any offering for sin” (Heb. 10:18). So, are the law's sin sacrifices forever, or have they ended? Well, the Hebrew word translated “forever” in Lev 16:34 is עוֹלָ֗ם (olam). And while it can mean “forever,” it’s also regularly used to refer to an “unknown duration of time.” For example, Exodus 21:6 says, “he shall be his slave forever (olam).” Which obviously refers to the rest of the person’s life, not eternity. (See also: Exod. 14:13, 21:6; Deut 15:17; 1 Sam. 1:22, 2:35, 20:23, 27:12, 28:2, 1 Chron. 28:4). Because of the work of Jesus, we know that when Lev 16:34 said that sin sacrifices are to last _olam,_ it could not have meant literally "forever." It meant until Christ, who was our atoning sacrifice for sin, “once for all” (Heb. 10:10) And now, “There is no longer any offering for sin.” (Heb. 10:18) 2.) Are you suggesting God has two different standards of obedience for His people?! 3.) The NT shows all kinds of disciples and apostles-who were living in the first days of the new covenant-confused about what was required. Even Peter was so confused that both Jesus (Acts 10) and Paul (Gal 2) had to correct him. In fact, most of the epistles in the NT were written to help clear up the confusion among early believers. Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots Thanks for taking the time to respond. 1. Yes, the OT is clear that the sin sacrifices are forever and that the levitical priesthood would NEVER lack a priest and make sacrifices FOREVER. The problem is that you're using the books that MAKE the claim that the sacrifices ended to ASSERT that the sacrifices ended. You can't use the claim as proof. (Also re: olam- humans are physical and don't last forever. The Torah does not have this problem.) 2. Exactly! The dual standard had the potential to be a lethal problem for early Christianity. Paul had to know that gentiles would never convert to Christianity if they had to follow the Jewish Torah and be circumcised. Hence the manufactured claim that Jesus ended the sacrifices and obedience to the Law was not required. I believe that the Jerusalem church was following the Torah- why else would they make Gentiles follow 4 of the Laws if the Jews themselves didn't have to follow the Law themselves. That makes zero sense. 3. Yes, there was confusion and still is today. That's why the Jewish people as a whole thoroughly reject Jesus. It flies in the face of the of the clear claim that the Law is forever, for all generations, always a Levitical priest to make sacrifices forever. Also, it goes against the messianic age prophecies that the sin sacrifices will resume in the future.
I don't agree, the LAW... TORAH was not done away with, it was RENEWED... it is the ketubah or the wedding contract with HIS bride. Throughout the word is HIS desire for a people spoken through wedding parables. He still requires HIS bride to follow HIS commandments. "If you love me, you will follow ALL of my commands. There at the time was and still, is the Talmudic law written and taught be the pharisees and contains some pretty disturbing laws.
Hi, Tim! I teach and believe that obedience to God is of utmost importance for believers. We are to submit to His authority over our lives. Jesus said, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15). I’m sure you would agree that not every command God has given applies to every person at all times. Some only apply to certain people (i.e., men, women, parents, Levitical priests) or at certain times (i.e., building an ark, gathering manna, while in exile). And I’m sure you would also agree that we are each only expected to keep the commands of God that apply to us. The NT expressly teaches that many of the commands given under the Old Covenant Law do not apply to Christians today. (ex. Repeated blood sacrifices for sin are no longer required (Heb 10:18).) We still serve God and obey His commands, “But now we are released from the law, having died with Christ to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code” (Rom 7:6). And “If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law: (Gal. 5:18). Blessings, Rob
RL Solberg thank you for your service in teaching the scriptures. I hope you know that these have been helping me and my family detox from years of HRM teaching. It’s good to be back to focusing on Jesus Christ!
Thank you for sharing that, Bradley! That means more to me than you know. God is so good to us!
Blessings,
Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots what is your salvation theology?
Jesus is the way of salvation! Jesus took our sin upon Himself (2 Corinthians 5:21). Jesus died in our place (Romans 5:8), taking the punishment that we deserve. Three days later, Jesus rose from the dead, proving His victory over sin and death (Romans 6:4-5). Why did He do it? Jesus answered that question Himself: “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). Jesus died so that we could live. If we place our faith in Jesus, trusting His death as the payment for our sins, all of our sins are forgiven and washed away. We will then have our spiritual hunger satisfied. The lights will be turned on. We will have access to a fulfilling life. We will know our true best friend and good shepherd. We will know that we will have life after we die-a resurrected life in heaven for eternity with Jesus!
@@noahcole6856 Thanks for asking, Noah! I believe that by the grace of God, we are saved through faith in Jesus and nothing else. Salvation is not something we earn by any good works we do, but rather a gift from God. I further believe we are saved in order to engage in good works to the honor and glory of Christ.
"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do" (Eph. 2:8-10).
Blessings,
Rob
@ do you believe we need to turn from sin to be saved?
I love your teaching brother. Stay humble as your audience grows. Stay strong in the face of adversity, through the power of The Holy Spirit. 🙏🏼
Thank you Dr. Solberg, may our Lord and Savior bless you abundantly!
Those who insist that it is only by keeping the law I dont think realize that what they are saying is: they wish to be judged by their keeping of the law. Whereby No One was or is able to fully keep the Law in perfectness. You break one law, you have broken them all. Thank you, Father, thank you, Yeshua, thank you, Holy Spirit.
This is the best explanation of this passage I have ever heard. Thank you for what you do. 🙏
Thank you, Sherri!
~ 27:00 --- "fulfill" ---- wow, i really appreciate this understanding
Wow, that Romans 3 exposition at 56:15 is really good. Righteousness of God MANIFESTED apart from the law.
If you examine that "righteousness" it is talking about justification. Being JUSTIFIED through the atoning blood of the Messiah by faith, Romans3:21-25, vs 25 nails it. There is an exchange from the works of the law (the sacrificial system which blood could never take away sins Hebrews10:4) and the work of the Messiah, His blood does the work, Romans3:25, Hebrews10. Hebrews10 really explicitly tells you specifically explains the changing of the guard.
Paul said in Romans that love is the fulfillment of the Law!
Love God & Love thy neighbor
I totally agree, but the point of the video seems to be that we don't have to fulfill the law any longer. So why does he speak of fulfilling the law here? Are we to fulfill the law even though it is said that he did it for us? Yes, we are to fulfill the law.
Perfect! Masterfully handled. Thank you. In your ending it became so clear to me what "imputed righteousness" is, and "how" it is the only way that God can declare us worthy. He, God, as we (shall) stand before Him, will see us "as if" The Son stands in our place. This does not imply (to me, at least) that I will not have to render account for my actions, words, and motives, on the contrary, here is where the worthless will be burned as hay and stubble.What remains, thereafter, is what I receive reward for. My entrance is assured, soley on my faith in Christ.
Not as eloquent of a response as yours, but my spirit understands.
Quite eloquent, Marihad.
Blessings!
Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots❤Blessed Thanksgivingto you and all those whom you love
Great teaching! Keep up the humility and care in communicating. I am sure that those who agree and disagree all appreciate it. Keep up the good work.
A show of faith is the ultimate conceit.
Ethics from faith gives us the worst navigators, like Moses, believing travel is best done with one foot in fantasyland.
Is the faith vocabulary a dog-whistle for Christofascists? Does anything prove faith worthy of respect more than finding prophets & cherubim in the Yellow Pages? Faith gives us preaching to the choir & wolves dressed as sheep, violence justified using the vocabulary of fantasyland. Faith ignores "it is a wicked generation seeking signs", such as resurrections. The great evil of faith is being a tool of authoritarians, a mask for insanity & indoctrinating children with a fantasyland. It is delusional to promote democracy when the country is owned by Citizens United & billionaires.
The attraction for low esteem, is the power of delusions of greatness, having some relationship with a deity. Low esteem is masked with ultimate audacity, at knowing this or that of God.
Faith gives us preaching to the choir & wolves dressed as sheep, violence justified using the vocabulary of fantasyland. Faith ignores "it is a wicked generation seeking signs", such as resurrections.
Does anything prove faith worthy of respect more than finding prophets & cherubim in the Yellow Pages?
@ wow you are really good with words. I would say you misunderstood what faith means from Jesus’s standpoint and thats understandable because of how many times people have said faith. Faith in the same way the scientists like Einstein look at the evidence and interpret the universe to have had a start and conclude - “the evidence points to this conclusion, so I trust this conclusion until proven otherwise.” The evidence, recognized by world religions, atheist historians and philosophers, and by martyrs and living testimonies of his resurrection, Jesus is of much importance and is special. Jesus DID die on a cross, and may have just risen from the dead. Those who have taken Jesus’s teaching to love their enemies, respect all people, and live a moral life have changed the fabric of culture from the abolition of slavery to the civil rights movement while those who misinterpret his teachings are their opponents. So I say, looking at the evidence, “the evidence points to this man Jesus really being who he said he is and rising from the grave and being of utmost importance and benefit to our lives, thus I put my faith, my trust in his words.” What do you think?
@Stupidityindex ...jerk
Why don’t you tell us what you really think😃? No seriously. What DO you believe?
Great breakdown of those passages! Verse 19 was Yeshua's "preamble" for the beginning of the teaching of the commandments he referred to when he said, "Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of "THESE" commandments," then from verse 21, he proceeded until the end of chapter 7 to elucidate the commandments he was referring to.
There's a difference from someone not eating things for health concerns and commemorating times of the year for exhibitibg their love of Christ, but when those things are done out of the belief that doing those things make you righteous or the belief that YHWH will send you to eternal damnation for not worshipping on the Gregorian Saturday, gives a distorted view of Christ's love for us!
The promises were given to Abraham, a Hebrew, but not an Israelite, who came from a family of paganism, neither Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, nor the Israelites in Egypt prior to the coming of Moses were given the Levitical Law
Galatians 3:19-25! ❤️
Thank you for that excellent comment. When the law is used for righteousness, it becomes a stumbling block for our spiritual edification and that of others.
@@theophosticphil The law is not for the sake of righteousness. We got baptized (this is also a commandment) because we wanted to get closer to Christ.
The same is done freely, out of love, for any commandment. It should be encouraged. It is not obligatory, the same way you cannot force someone to give charity from their heart.
But we know that charity it good, but is also a commandment.
Paul also uses the word "till" in Galatians 3:16-29. Paul said the law was "added" 430 years "after" the promise made to Abraham "till" the seed (Christ) could come to whom the promise was made. In Galatians 4:24-31 Paul spoke of the "two covenants" and instructed the Galatian believers to "cast out" the Sinai Covenant of "bondage".
New Covenant Whole Gospel: How many modern Christians cannot honestly answer the questions below?
Who is the King of Israel in John 1:49? Is the King of Israel now the Head of the Church, and are we His Body? Who is the “son” that is the “heir” to the land in Matthew 21:37-43? Why did God allow the Romans to destroy the Old Covenant temple and the Old Covenant city, about 40 years after His Son fulfilled the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34 in blood at Calvary?
What the modern Church needs is a New Covenant Revival (Heb. 9:10) in which members of various denominations are willing to re-examine everything they believe and see if it agrees with the Bible, instead of the traditions of men. We need to be like the Bereans. It will be a battle between our flesh and the Holy Spirit. It will not be easy. If you get mad and upset when someone challenges your man-made Bible doctrines, that is your flesh resisting the truth found in God's Word. Nobody can completely understand the Bible unless they understand the relationship between the Old Covenant given to Moses at Mount Sinai and the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary.
God is not now a “racist”. He has extended His love to all races of people through the New Covenant fulfilled by His Son’s blood at Calvary. The Apostle Paul warned against using “genealogies” in our faith in 1 Tim. 1:4, and Titus 3:9.
If the New Covenant is "everlasting" in Hebrews 13:20 and the Old Covenant is "obsolete" in Hebrews 8:13, why would any Christian believe God is going back to the Old Covenant system during a future time period?
Indeed ❤
Another great teaching. Thank you so much for helping me out of the errors of Torahism! I might suggest that Heaven and Earth are idioms for the temple and Jerusalem, both of which were destroyed in 70 AD.
Thanks, Nancy. I’ve heard that idea about the temple, but I’m not convinced that’s what Jesus meant here. Maybe!
Rob.
Cosmic deconstruction language is sometimes used of nations or kingdoms being conquered or destroyed, I'm not sure of temple or a city though. Maybe speaking of the age of the Old Covenant coming to an end?
I definitely hold to this view. If you look at carefully examination of Matthew 24, Mark 13:1-8, and Luke 21:5-9 it speaks about judgment and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.
@@joshuamelton9148 I agree 👍
Another way that fulfilled is used is this;
Galatians 5:14
[14]For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
For what it's worth.
One of my favorite videos you've done! I wish more Christians understood that Jesus is the TRUE Israel of God! 🙌🏼
YES 🙌✝️🙌
☝️😁👍 Just finished my first run-through of this (because it's meaty enough I'll need at least a couple more "listens" to absorb everything), thanks!
Also have been reading the comments & for the most part am disappointed, because it's mostly the same ol' same ol' "Yeah, but" Squad saying the same ol' things they always say (i.e. not really engaging honestly with the content & some obviously didn't even bother to watch the video they're so vehemently objecting to), but TG there are a couple fresh voices I find interesting...
To sum: I shall return 😅
Not under the law. So.. how’s that general concept of lawlessness working out for our nation? 😢
Which law?
We need The Equalizer. The old one was good, but I actually prefer Denzel
@@TRINITYTVint are we cherry pickers??? What do you mean which law???
How about every law that we cannot possibly keep such as the temple and sacrificial laws???
And that means, yes, the Sabbath laws, holy days, dietary laws and how we treat others still apply which are what the ten commandments actually teach. The first four teach how to love God and the following six how to love others. Cherry picking will not profit anybody. How about this? What did Jesus do? Did Jesus keep all of the law???
How about the apostles in the first century, did they? Of course they did, and they did only because they had the Spirit of Christ in them. Or do you think that the Spirit that led Christ into keeping all of the law will lead anyone of us into doing this differently???
Someone asked are we cherry pickers, then goes on to cherry pick the law, interesting.
@@rdaleyj1 the Spirit of God is not given so that we can keep Moses laws, he is sealed in us so that we can keep Jesus commands.
BTW Jesus was sinless even before the Spirit came upon him when he was baptised.
Everyone who tries to be right with God by works is under the power of sin, and rules and regulations empower the sin nature, that's why we must die to human regulations and laws.
so that we can be freed from the power of sin and death, and live by the 'law of the Spirit of life' and the law of Christ.
This only applies to the body of Christ, not the wolves and foxes who try to usurp the message of the cross.
Excellent, thanks
So much meaty content to chew. Thank you Rob. You never disappoint. SHABBAT SHALOM!
Shabbat Shalom!
he disappoints when he teaches the 10 Commandments are no longer valid
@@salpezzino7803Rob has never taught that the ten are invalid.
@@jonuvark2385 yes he has
Not so much required, more like because we believe, as Abraham believed. And of course because we love him.
good teaching!
now I'm going to have to read your article : )
I would suggest that the "until" H&E shows from their worldview the temple represents the heavens and the earth. It was the witness which is why Jesus prophesied it's destruction.
Once that faded away the fullness of of the new Covenant which was already taking hold was able to fully be implemented...
That is the Crux for the Hebrew roots movement will have as a hill to die on..... They will say something like this, see I can walk out my door and see Heaven and Earth is still here so clearly the law is in full effect.
Psalm 78:69 is: "He built his sanctuary like the high heavens, like the earth, which he has founded for ever." The actual holy place and most holy place inside the Temple building were constructed like earth and heaven. The courts outside represented the sea.
@@CHURCHofX agree 100 Percent this is missed by those who are un-familiar with how heaven and earth was depicted in ancient israel look into covenant eschatology, I pray more can come to understand these things.
@@CHURCHofX been guilty of exactly that 🤣🤣
I since read the apostolic fathers and went over church history and left Hebrew roots after 7 years. Now convinced of orthodoxy having read the letters of the church father's and how the faith was originally taught and performed
Deut. 30 mentions heaven and earth as the two witnesses of the mosaic covenant. When they are removed, i.e. Rev 20, then all is fulfilled. Until then, if you hold to all is fulfilled, then you should be consistent and become a full preterist. Just how I see it. Please tell me where I'm wrong. Eschatology and theology are interlinked. You can't argue for one without seeing the other. To argue anti-nomionism is to be a full preterist.
@@wyattwohltman603 except that the law changed, and since the law changed we don't get to pick and choose.
Great point on how pleroo is used in Matthew. A comment on righteousness. The verses You used when talking about righteousness said it was God's Righteousness that we received through Christ. It seems scripture is saying that The Father prepared a lamb sacrifice that took 4 thousand years to come about and nurtured Him and became His most beloved lamb from the flock and was brought to the heavenly temple and made us acceptable in God's sight but it was God's Righteousness that it brought about. You definitely jumped in the fire (of debate) with this video. Thanks
Thanks!
Thank you for the support, Kevin!
Blessings, Rob
Great teaching. I agree 100%
I keep hearing the Torah roots movement talking about if we are not Israel we need to be grafted in and once you accept Jesus you are grafted in which means now I have to start doing Jewish things Torah things, can you help me and explain this to me what grafted in means?
You will want to read and study Romans 11. Note the word "faith" in verse 20. Also, please read and study Acts 15:1-31. Also, 1 Corinthians 7:17-24.
@ thank you! I I never thought I would be pondering whether or not I’m a Christian. geez!!
@@dancingzolins6782 thank you so much for your help, I need to truly” bible study”! I’ve been a church pew listener.
Hallelujah
Well done
Fulfilled≠abolished≠destroyed. I love pointing out that in fulfilling the law, He abolished the law, but didn't destroy it, so that He can forever reap the rewards for fulfilling it
We know from scripture that "all" doesn't always literally mean ALL. In the case of Matt: 5:17-19, ALL WAS FULFILLED with His death and resurrection. He declared: "It is finished!"
John 19:28 (NKJV) tells us, "After this, Jesus, knowing that ALL things were now accomplished [finished], that the Scripture [Tanakh] might be FULFILLED, said, 'I thirst!'"
Also, in Luke (in the parallel verses to Matthew 24), which are about the destruction of the temple, Yeshua says this:
Luke 21:22 (NKJV): "For these are the days of vengeance, that ALL things which are written may be FULFILLED."
Acts 3:18 echoes Matt. 5:17-19: "But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus FULFILLED."
@nancykindt6487
19 hours ago
We know from scripture that "all" doesn't always literally mean ALL. In the case of Matt: 5:17-19, ALL WAS FULFILLED with His death and resurrection. He declared: "It is finished!"
*Well, all that concerned his first coming was fulfilled by his death and resurrection, but it is trivial to demonstrate that not all the prophecies concerning Christ were fulfilled back at his first coming. Christ himself in Matthew 23 said he could not gather the people which is part of the prophecy of Deuteronomy 30 which Christ comes back in Matthew 24 and argues will be fulfilled at his second coming when the trumpet is blown and his angels gather his people from the ends of heaven.
Christ in Isaiah 63 coming with died garments from Bozrah after treading the winefat doesn’t happen until his second coming either as explained by John in Revelation 19 when Christ will tread the winepress of Almighty God.
Christ’s coming at the end of Isaiah 59 is another prophecy Christ did not fulfill, and there are many others.
But, Christ did not claim that “Till I go and die on the cross, not one jot or tittle shall in anywise pass from the law.” Instead, Christ gives the sign of Heaven and earth passing away, a sign he comes back to show John after the cross in Revelation 21:1.
So, Christ was trying to preserve the law of Moses, not get rid of it. If he had been teaching contrary to the law of Moses, Isaiah 8:20 would declare there is no light in him, and his title “the light of the world” would have no meaning or legitimacy. But, in verse 16 he wants our light to shine and to do good works, because those are the good works of the law in line with Isaiah 8:20. Because in Isaiah 8:16, God is trying to bind up the testimony and seal the law among his disciples, not take the law away from them. Binding the testimony to the right hand and sealing the law on the forehead is from the Mosaic law in Deuteronomy 6. It is the protection God’s people need to keep them from taking the mark of the beast in their right hand and forehead instead in Revelation 14. Because those who get the victory over the beast and his image in Revelation 15 stand on the sea of glass singing the song of Moses and the Lamb: demonstrating how relevant Moses is in these end times. But, sadly, many Christians do not want that victory, and they teach people to come out from under the law and reject Moses.
@@coreybray9834 Judging from past experience trying to reason with you at length, I believe continuing to do so would be a waste of time as there is still a veil over your heart and you refuse to see your errors.
18:05 that Nashville country accent slipped out for a sec aha 😂
What are y’all talkin’ about? 😉
It's catchy! I moved from California to Georgia & the other day I caught myself saying "I'm fixin' to.." 👀🤣🤣🤣
I would like to know who can keep the law?
Mat 5.17 ¶Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
We read about heaven and earth passing away in chptr 24. Pretty sure that hasnt happened yet.
1Jhn 5.3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.
Is the love of God grievous?
Rev 12.17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Paul teaches we are grafted in. Are you?
He who sins (disobey’s the Father’s commandment’s) is of the devil. Of course our current serpent teachers say, go ahead, disobey. You won’t surely die. God loves you. Just “believe”.
@docscantlin
We all have sinned and miss the mark. Believers in Yeshua don't come up for condemnation. Doent mean Grace is a license to continue breaking God's Law. We must learn and do. I grew up without God's Law. Late in life when I got here. Had to weed out all the false teachings. Scripture teaches Scripture. When you come across a contradiction, know that it's man made. Truth is in the Scriptures.
@@docscantlin Romans 6 rebukes you.
"Don't even think I've come to abolish the law, but I'm abolishing the law." Hmmmm
Jesus is superseding the Law. All the Law can do is tell you that you are a lawbreaker. Jesus already knows that those of us of age (should know the difference between right and wrong) are sinners. His blood can cleanse us of all our sins continually, if we chose by faith to believe that Jesus is our Savior.
The ten commandments ea not avlvolushed but the ceremonial was fulfilled thus all of that law is no longer necessary. We do not make sacrifices or any of the ceremonies and ritual cleansing that were necessary under the ceremonial law. The ceremonial law was kept outside the ark because this law was a foreshadow of the Messiah. If we continue to keep the ceremonial law when we are rejecting Jesus sacrifice. The ceremonial law is not the moral law, that was kept inside the ark.
That is not even close to nearly the correct summary of most arguments that say we no longer need to keep the old covenant laws.
@@mpattilo Rob teaches the 10 are abolished.
Hi, Jeff. I anticipated and answered that exact objection at 45:50 in this video.
Rob
Psalm 78 is connected with Matthew 5 if you look up the word stoma and read Psalm 78 and how it says to keep the Torah. also if you read on to where Yeshua said if your righteousness doesnt exceed that of the pharisees etc so read 1 John 3:7 and the psalm 119:142 for context
Jhn 15:10 If you keep My commandments, you shall abide in My love, even as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love.
Jhn 5:46 For if you had believed Moses, you would have believed Me, for he wrote of Me.
Jhn 5:47 But if you do not believe his writings, how shall you believe My Words?
Act 15:21 For Moses from ages past has those in every city proclaiming him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
As new born again babes give them 4 commandments and as they go hear Moses being preached they’ll grow towards salvation by turning from lawlessness
2Pe 3:15 Bear in mind that the patience of our Lord means salvation-just as our dearly loved brother Paul also wrote to you with the wisdom given to him.
2Pe 3:16 He speaks about these matters in all of his letters. Some things in them are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist (as they also do with the rest of the Scriptures)-to their own destruction.
2Pe 3:17 Since you already know all this, loved ones, be on your guard so that you are not led astray by the error of the lawless and lose your sure footing.
2Pe 3:18 Instead, keep growing in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Yeshua the Messiah. To Him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity! Amen.
1Pe 2:2 As newborn babes, long for pure spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow toward salvation-
1Pe 2:3 now that you have tasted that the Lord is good.
Psa 19:7 The law of the Lord is perfect, converting souls: the testimony of the Lord is faithful, instructing babes.
Deu 6:1 “And this [is] the command, the statutes and the judgments which your God YHWH has commanded to teach you to do in the land which you are passing over there to possess it,
Deu 6:2 so that you fear your God YHWH, to keep all His statutes and His commands which I am commanding you, you, and your son, and your son’s son, all [the] days of your life, and so that your days are prolonged.
1Jn 2:3 Now we know that we have come to know Him by this-if we keep His commandments.
1Jn 2:4 The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
1Jn 2:5 But whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God is truly made perfect. We know that we are in Him by this-
1Jn 2:6 whoever claims to abide in Him must walk just as He walked.
1Co 11:1 Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Messiah.
If Yeshua walked in the commandments of His Father and we are to imitate Him then we would walk in His footsteps being led by His Spirit
Yeshua didn’t bring a new doctrine of His own
Jhn 7:16 Yeshua answered, “My teaching is not from Me, but from Him who sent Me.
Jhn 7:17 If anyone wants to do His will, he will know whether My teaching comes from God or it is Myself speaking.
Jhn 7:18 Whoever speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but He who seeks the glory of the One who sent Him, He is true and there is no unrighteousness in Him.
Jhn 7:19 Hasn’t Moses given you the Torah? Yet none of you keeps it. Why are you trying to kill Me?”
That there is the most perfect answer of scripture Yeshua said if you do the will of God you’ll know if i teach my own doctrine or its from God and then He says you don’t keep the Torah so youre not doing Gods will
I delight to do Your will, O my God. Yes, Your Torah is within my being.” Psalm 40:8
0:00
Matthew 5:17-20-which is that passage that starts with Jesus saying, “I have not come to abolish
the law and the prophets but to fulfill them”- that’s probably the most common proof text used
by our “Torah-keeping” friends to bolster their belief that Christians are required to keep the
old covenant law.
*Well, if Christ is saying he didn’t come to abolish the law, and Christians start spouting that the law is abolished by Christ on the cross, then they are just striving to make a liar out of Christ. Christ is called “The light of the world” and that indicates that his doctrine can pass the test God set forth in Isaiah 8:20. If Christ came preaching against the law and the testimony, he wouldn’t be able to legitimately be called the light of the world, because Isaiah 8:20 would declare there is no light in him.
So, anyone teaching against the law and testimony, God has already judged there is no light in these people and that is 95% of Christian theologians and pastors today. And Christ warns us in Matthew 4:4 to live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God, like the words in Isaiah 8:20 that Christians are not living by because their pastors and theologians are not properly informing them of this critical test for light. And so, Professor, you should be starting a couple verses earlier and understanding why Christ tells his followers to let their light shine. The works Christ wanted his followers to perform in verse 16 were the good works of the law and testimony in line with Isaiah 8:20, so that when other men would see these light bearing works they would glorify God in heaven.*
Solberg: And there’s no doubt that text speaks profoundly about the law and its enduring
importance. But one thing it doesn’t say is that followers of Jesus are under that law.
*And you think Christ would need to remind a circumcised Jewish audience who your own buddy Paul in Galatians 5 insists are debtors to do the whole law what their obligation to the law was??? LOL!
Come on, Professor, every first century Jew in that audience would have known their basic obligation to keep the law of Moses, even Christ’s closest inner circle of followers, and the circumcised Christ himself. What should concern you more is Christ never tells us to come out from under the Mosaic law in the gospels. Because if he ever did that, any first century Jew familiar with Isaiah 8:20 would identify him as a liar and fraud who has no light in him immediately, arguing he is not the “light of the world” as claimed. I don’t think you properly understand what it is you are up against here and what kind of shame you are trying to heap on the character and reputation of Christ with your deep misunderstanding of Scripture here.
If Christ wanted to test that boundry and blatantly violate Isaiah 8:20 and send the message that his followers should not keep the law of Moses, all he would have had to have said in the gospel is to “Stop circumcising”! That’s all he would have to say to break the Old Covenant once and for all. He never uttered those words before the cross, and he never uttered those words after the cross. Instead, man waited 20-years after Christ was gone in Acts 15 to conveniently start tampering with circumcision and the law. And they didn’t quote anything Christ actually said in Acts 15 as their reason for doing so, because they knew darn good and well Christ never promoted such abject nonsense against circumcision and the Mosaic law. And God foretold in Ezekiel 44 that their mistake in Acts 15 would lead to a future polluting of his house and breaking of his covenant the moment they bring uncircumcised strangers/gentiles into the future Davidic temple. The fact that God warns centuries in advance what their mistake would lead to should be enough to demonstrate just how wrong the early Christians were for abandoning circumcision and man’s obligation to the Mosaic law in the case of the strangers/gentiles. God instead, in Isaiah 56, invited the strangers/gentiles to come in and embrace his Sabbath and covenant, not be taught to reject those aspects of serving God under the Mosaic law like you are doing to deny them a name better than sons and daughters in God’s house. But, the last four verses of Isaiah 56 did warn us that shepherds like you would come in to mess things up for the strangers/gentiles in this respect. Funny how completely on top of things God is in the prophecies, like he knew you were coming to do this very harm to his people.
That mean is God from old testament that give the law to israel, keep HIS promises to israel till all fullfilled...all the law still valid to israel, eventhough they still dont believe Jesus Christ is their messiah, God will fullfill all HIS promises to israel..
Fulfilling
Matthew was written before Mark. Mark concentrates on the actions of Jesus Christ. Mark's gospel concentrates mainly on the framework of Jesus's actions during His earthly ministry, as recorded by Matthew. (I think of Mark as being a Readers Digest version from Matthew. I know very few of you have ever heard about Readers Digest.)
Matthew's theme, for his gospel, is about all the prophecies that the coming Messiah would fulfill and that Jesus fulfilled all these prophecies, signifying that He is the Messiah, the Christ.
Matthew's gospel is totally wrapped around the Old Testament Messianic prophecies that Jesus fulfilled and the prophecies that Jesus has given us about the last days, which started with the resurrection of Jesus Christ. (Jesus, in our Bible, through His own teachings and His teachings He gave the authors of the New Testament books, has told us all the prophecies that we can expect to receive in these last days.)
Jesus taught Paul, in Arabia, His gospel that He wanted Paul to spread to all us Gentiles and to share with all the Jews. Jesus, in His teachings to Paul, caused him to turn completely around from believing that he was righteous because he had the Law (also learned that Jesus was the only Jew who ever was fully obedient to the Law, thereby obedient to God the Father) to being an apostle telling the world that we could be saved, be righteous, only by faith in the belief that Jesus is our Savior, the Messiah, the Christ.
Paul also learned that the most important way that us Christians should exhibit Christ in our lives is love.
Paul, in 1 Timothy 1:8-11, tells us Christians how we should regard the Law: But we KNOW that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane,... according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.
Fulfill..to teach the full Law correctly thus bringing an END to the false interpretation of the educated religious
establishment ( nothing new under the sun )..this is why He said, “ you have heard it say …BUT I SAY..He was teaching the Law correctly…teaching the Law in its fullness…the giver of the Law is HOLY and GOOD…that is why
the Law is HOLY and GOOD…Got Torah Got Truth
You'll have to let Matthew define fulfill... And that's not it..
@@Kenn-rb7gq oh sorry..ya.. I forgot you and Matthew were close buddies and he told you exactly what he meant by fulfill…your full of it..Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770 Why don't you read the first 4 chapters and see how he used the word there, it's called a context.
@@Kenn-rb7gq Rob mentioned the context…it was to put an end to…that exactly how I used it
To put an end to the false interpretation of the Law by the religious class ..and teaching the Law
Fully..correctly..God is HOLY and GOOD…that’s why the scriptures say that the Law is HOLY and GOOD…which begs the question…why do so many who identify as Christians claim that God is good then try to CONvince others not to follow His good example…double minded people are not fit for His Kingdom..Got Torah Got Truth
@@harryabrahams2770 To put an end to the false interpretation? Where's that in the text? He's quoting Moses, the Law, not the false teachers' interpretation. ‘You shall not commit adultery’; - that's not a false interpretation, that's the Law of Moses.
From verse 19 up to the ends Jesus trying to teach them what the old laws can do to them if they want to keep it, and Jesus update the laws and take it where it's starting the damages is the heart, adultery only by looking you already committed adultery, and that's is the sad part trying to keep the laws, no one no not one will measures up.
So dont try?
@anthonypalelei8559
1 day ago
From verse 19 up to the ends Jesus trying to teach them what the old laws can do to them if they want to keep it, and Jesus update the laws and take it where it's starting the damages is the heart, adultery only by looking you already committed adultery,
*I guess I am fortunate, being mostly blind. I can’t look at women and get aroused anymore. LOL! Who ever said losing your sight wasn’t a blessing!*
and that's is the sad part trying to keep the laws, no one no not one will measures up.
*I think Lucifer agrees 100%. Why try to keep the law of a being who is impossible to please because he set the bar too high to set you up to fail? Like Lucifer in Revelation 12:17, you are on the cusp of joining his side of this war against commandment keepers. But, if Christians join Lucifer and reject God’s law, proving by Isaiah 8:20 there is no light in them, then what will the future of Christian anarchy produce if not a brutal hell for everyone involved once push really comes to shove just as Habakkuk 1:4 predicts???
God, on the otherhand, seems to think the days are coming in Isaiah 2:1-5 when the law will once again go forth from Zion. At this time, God will achieve something the anti-law Christians and all their anarchy could never achieve. He will demonstrate that with his law in place, the nations will beat their swords into pruning hooks and plowshares and not learn war anymore. So, maybe God’s law isn’t as impossible to keep as Christians are trying to make it appear. Maybe, as Isaiah 24:5-6 declares, what they are really begging for is the curse that devours the whole earth when God gets sick and tired of his law being transgressed.
By the way, have you ever read Isaiah 8:16 in conjunction with Deuteronomy 6 and Revelation 14? There seems to be this thing in Scripture about what gets bound to your right hand and forhead. God seems to want to bind the testimony and seal his law in the foreheads of his people, but they don’t want his seal. What they would rather do is take the mark of the beast in their right hand and forehead instead. Proving to God every step of the way that there idea of rejecting his law and testimony is far better than being protected by it from the mark of the beast. But, I think God is the one who will have the last laugh on that front, because in Revelation 15, it is only those who sing the song of Moses and the Lamb ((The two prophets of Deuteronomy 18 who gave us the law and the gospel) who stand victorious on the sea of glass.
@@brianfixitguy2494 This silly argument that no one can keep God’s Laws perfectly is not well thought through. Bring it to a family level: There has been NO child that has ever kept all the Laws(Rules) of a household. So… we of course remove the requirements and our children can decide what is right in their own eyes. This is what repentance is all about. Final comment: Sin is transgression of the Law(Torah). 1John 3:4, Romans 3:20 and 7:7. This is Paul telling us so. Remember, 2Peter 3:15-19 tells us that if we don’t have a foundation in the Torah, we will miss understand Paul and become Lawless(without Torah). This website fulfills this prophecy perfectly.
Jesus forefilled them because we couldnt. Tha law is about sinfull behavior.. and we are by nature sinners. To complete them ( the sin of mankind )hefus had to sacrifice him self. On the cross
Matthew 5 says that He didn't come to DESTROY which is not the same as abolish
Actually, J Big, the Greek word translated into English as "abolish" is καταλύω (katalyō). And it means "destroy, tear down, abolish." This is why many translations use the English word "destroy" in Matt. 5:17 (ASV, ERV, LEB, KJV).
Rob
You're not being honest with the Bible when you can clearly see that in other parts where it uses abolish that it's a completely different word
Do you have an email I can contact?
You can contact me here: thebiblicalroots.org/#contact
Blessings,
Rob
Greetings from the Philippines...I love ur studies sir but i love Yahusha/Jesus so i obey His commandments as a sign of my obedience and my faith.shalom❤
bless you
my wife is from the philippines :) we are followers of Yeshua and His torah
do you obey God when He gave the Gentiles 4 restrictions then Commanded "No Greater Burden"
or are you a Cultist and believe those In Christ should keep the Law of Moses?
Shitlom
@@BiblersWayCottage Well you worship a false god.
Shitlom
@@salpezzino7803 I hope your last word was a typo on an otherwise excellent comment!
@@Adrian_Mason we shall see if he answers me
So Rob, what is the law now?
1 Corinthians 9:20-21
To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law."
@Kenn-rb7gq and I became a pedophile to the pedophiles, and a necromancer to those who practiced necromancy, etc?
So there are no laws?
Whatever we want i guess, pretty sad
@@brianfixitguy2494 it's amazing! I'm going to make a new rule about 2nd sabbath which takes place any day of the week where I just don't feel like getting out of bed
@@Kenn-rb7gqDoes this verse mean I can go commit a murder with a murderer to show them I'm a sinner in order to win them?
In the KJV it reads: "one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Which is what Jesus said he came to do in Mat 5:17.
He refers back to this after His resurrection in Luke 24:44 - "that all things must be fulfilled" and mentions in Luke 24:48 "And ye are witnesses of these things."
That's great if you're willing to ignore the part where he says "until heaven and earth pass"😂
@@tbishop4961. Jesus fulfilled the law. You are ignoring the part that says, "till all be fulfilled." Jesus fulfilled it before heaven and earth could pass away. The condition for the law continuing till heaven and earth pass away relies on it not being fulfilled.
@@jackslapp9073 if you squint real hard and rearrange the words, you can pretend whatever you want 😂
@@tbishop4961. And, that's not an argument against the literal interpretation of Matt. 5:17-18.
@@tbishop4961 I’m not ignoring it. It means “… it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.”
Luke 16:17
John 14:21 Whoever has my commands and obeys them he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.
Keep reading through John. Don't miss 13:34 and the rest of it, in context!
I think it we bring more Bible verses to interpret the meaning of Matthew 5:17-18,, like Jeremiah 31:31-33 because they break the laws so many times, Jesus wants to nails the laws to the cross Colossians 2:14-17, because the people were killed because of the laws Roman 7:7-14, the laws was good and holy but the people were rebellion, so the laws still be there, but it's not active anymore, it will be there as a written document to testify about Jesus Luke 24:44.
You seem to have made a mistake with the Matthew 2 reference regarding fulfil. The greek word used in that chapter is πληρωθῇ not πληρῶσαι (you said playrosy). In the LXX and new testament πληρῶσαι is used to mean fill up or consecrate.
Jesus spoke king James English. Everyone knows this
@@tbishop4961 lol 😅
Hi Simplemind. The Greek word in Matthew 2 is the same root word, it’s just a different case ending. In English, it would be kind of like the difference between: fulfill, fulfilled, fulfiller, fulfilling. And as I showed in my dozen or so examples, this is a word that Matthew consistently uses to mean “bring to a designed end,” specifically the fulfillment of prophecy.
Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots thanks for the response - I'll check to see how πληρωθῇ is used in the LXX
@@TheBiblicalRoots if I look at the use of πληρῶσαι in the LXX and then find the corresponding words in the masoretic, they are mal-lo-wt (consecrate), mal-le (consecrate), me-lo (fill up) or mal-lam (fill their). Whereas πληρωθῇ corresponds to me-lot (ended) or miq-qes (at the end). There appears to be a difference in meaning not case endings? Please can you point me to material that I can read or watch regarding the case endings
Two laws. Which one was done away with?
I did not come to destroy the law, I came to destroy it?
Hi Andrew. I anticipated and addressed that objection at 45:50 in this video.
Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots You are double talking.
You lost alot of credibility when you brought Myles Christian on and agreed with him.
KJV. Whosoever therefore shall BREAK (not relax)one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Romans 8:13
For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
I cringe even thinking what kind of mental gymnastics you're going to do here, but it's like a trainwreck i can't not look at
LOL! I think if you actually watch the video, you’ll find the exposition pretty thoughtful and easy to follow, T.
@TheBiblicalRoots I got halfway through, but I'll give it another go. I think what you need to be genuinely asking yourself is why the author wrote something so unclear that you need to add, delete, or redefine words in the passage to make it say what you think it should say. That's literally what every single one of you do with this passage
When people who have no relationship with God see you do this, they aren't impressed or fooled. They just think you've lied to them on behalf of Christians everywhere
@@TheBiblicalRootsyou continue to make the logical blunder of insisting that different books of the bible must be read in a way that "harmonizes" them or causes them to agree. They DON'T agree. You have to butcher the texts and intent of the authors to achieve your own intent
@@TheBiblicalRoots you need to go back to the beginning, read the law, and see what the law itself has to say about it's purpose, because you seem to not actually know the purpose
I know your intentions are good but you are painting your listeners into a corner. Try telling a Jewish person who knows tanakh that Matthew is citing predictive prophesies with his "fulfillment" passages and you set them up for humiliation. What Matthew actually does is to show the uncanny consistency between Jesus and the People throughout the generations. When you assume a zero-sum typology such that the antitype "New Moses" Jesus obliterates the ekktype "Old Moses" or the "Old Israel," you completely undermine Matthew's argument of continuity. It also doesn't truly support the Fulfillment-as-Replacement Hypothesis when you begin by applying that presumption to your citations from Matthew.
DISCLAIMER: I am not a Torah observant Christian.
Thanks, PSA! I hear what you're saying, though I see things differently. I agree with you that Matthew is drawing a very clear sense of continuity between the OT and the NT. But, if a Jewish person learns that prophecies in their own Scriptures have been fulfilled by Jesus, I don't see how that sets them up for humiliation. I imagine that news would either be seen as compelling or flatly rejected, depending on how open their heart is to the Gospel. Either way, the fact that Christians believe this shows how interconnected the Hebrew Bible and the NT truly are!
Rob
Rob, the potential humiliation occurs when a Christian is led to believe Matthew's "fulfill" indicates there was a predictive prophesy in the Tanakh that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene, or a predictive prophesy of the slaughter of infants in Bethlehem, or a predictive prophesy that Israel-meaning-Messiah would be called out of Egypt. Matthew is pointing out *in retrospect* the providential correspondence to establish patterns across generations. That is a very different concept from foretelling.
You use examples of Matthew's "fulfill" with regard to the words of the Prophets to bolster the idea that "fulfill" with regard to the Law can somehow mean to retire it; the visionary prediction gives way to the historical reality.
The problem is that even in regard to the words of the Prophets, that is not at all what he means. The Messiah's sojourn in Egypt did not undo r Exodus - neither the initial historical experience nor the covenant that came after. The mourning in Ramah didn't replace, relativize, transform or retire the experience of Jewish suffering around the capital. It was neither the first nor last instance of that pattern. The fact that Jesus was born in Bethlehem doesn't sunset the Branch-like destiny of the Messiah. Rather it initiates that destiny.
What Matthew does with those early instances of fulfill is typology rather than prediction, and it is not the supersessionist brand of zero-sum typology where the purpose of the antitype is to obliterate the ekktype.
More importantly, none of this supports the strange hypothesis that for Matthew, fulfilling commandments means retiring them.
In Hosea 11 Some try and say that the following is calling Jesus Israel BUT they miss the comma here. Jesus fulfilled the second half of this verse.
The New Covenant is for 'the house of Israel' and 'The House ofJudah' (Jer. 31:31-33) and is still in the future.
The Renewed covenant for us and beginning with Abe, who wasn't Jewish. (Gen. 15z;4-6/Ro.4:2,3ff/Gal.3:7ff)
Solberg: Not only
because if it taught that, it would contradict many other parts of the NT,
*If Christ were afraid of contradicting parts of the New Testament, he would have never rebuked Peter in Matthew 16 and warned him that he wasn’t savoring the things of God, but of men. Christ dares to contradict the New Testament-especially when New Testament individuals and authors say incorrect things. Case in point, Paul’s claiming in Ephesians 2:8-9 that man is saved by grace through faith and NOT OF WORKS. Christ comes back later to these same Ephesians in Revelation 2 and warns them to REPENT AND DO THE FIRST WORKS, else he would remove their candlestick, completely contradicting the advice Paul gave them. Why would Christ do that? Why not agree with what Paul said instead and tell them not to worry about works, because they are saved by grace like Paul was teaching the Ephesians? Because Paul was wrong. Also, it’s difficult to ignore the fact that even Paul didn’t have any problem contradicting Peter in Galatians 2, and even said he needed to do so because Peter needed to be blamed. So, anyone saying there are no contradictions in the New Testament are just reading the New Testament with their eyes closed and telling themselves fanciful lies to soothe their fragile inner child. But, I am a little shocked that a Professor with your level of experience suffers with this problem of accepting there are contradictions in the New Testament. I expect that from inexperienced amitures, but not a professor with any kind of professional standing. God could never correct mistakes if contradictions in the Bible are not allowed. For God to take a stance opposite of those he is correcting requires him to contradict people, Professor. That is basic logic, but Christians often don’t tend to have much respect for honesty and basic logic. It threatens their wrongful narritive that the Bible is free of any and all contradictions when God is actually contradicting the wrongful views of people all over the place. Do you think Christ agreed with everything the Jews were teaching or trying to trip him up with? Or, did he contradict their nonsense and expose the erroneous basis on which their misguided thinking resides? Every time Christ did that, he contradicted part of the New Testament in those instances too. So, you need a much better excuse and defense than you are leaning on above.
Solberg: He does the same thing with Isaiah 43, which is a prophecy about Israel’s Savior. Verses 18-19 say:
“Remember not the former things, nor consider the things of old. Behold, I am doing a new thing;
now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a way in the wilderness and rivers in
the desert.”Matthew speaks directly to the Jewish expectation of God doing a new thing.
*I think you misunderstand this prophecy, Professor. Early on Isaiah says the following which Christ says he was not able to do at his first coming in Matthew 23, but is what he suggests will happen later at his second coming in Matthew 24 in line with Deuteronomy 30 as well.
Isa 43:4 - Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been honourable, and I have loved thee: therefore will I give men for thee, and people for thy life.
Isa 43:5 - Fear not: for I am with thee: I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather thee from the west;
Isa 43:6 - I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth;
Here is Christ admitting that did not happen at his first coming.
Mat 23:37 - O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
But, instead, Christ says it will happen at his second coming.
Mat 24:30 - And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
Mat 24:31 - And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
So, what Isaiah is talking about, when God does a new thing and why they will not remember the former things of old, is because at the second coming he will destroy the earth, moving every mountain and island out of its place in Revelation 6 in the sixth seal. And he will create a new heaven and new earth in Revelation 21:1. This is why Isaiah 66 comes back and reminds us of how God’s people will be brought to him again before heading into the New Earth in verses 22-23. So, Isaiah 43 is not a prophecy about what transpired at Christ’s first coming, but is concerning events related to his second coming.
That is why it is unreliable to depend on the Jewish expectations. They were expecting Christ to come and overthrow their enemies too at his coming, but he didn’t meet that expectation of Micah 5’s prophecy either. Some prophecies speak to events around Christ’s first coming, some speak to the fulfillment of events between the first and second coming of Christ like in Matthew 24, and others are reserved to be fulfilled later at his second coming and beyond. And that is why Christians who try to usher in Jeremiah 31 at the first coming of Christ to introduce the New Covenant way too soon end up messing themselves up and getting things very wrong. And that is why you find yourself attacking what Christ says in Matthew 5:17-20, because you think Christ is trying to separate his people from their obligation to the Mosaic law, but he was doing the exact opposite.
Fill up
You are referring to ordnance laws made by Moses, the law giver. Not the Law of I AM whitch are the Ten Commandments
given to Moses by God by Angels
Where does the Bible say that some laws are made by Moses and that the 10 are of I Am?
Hi Nina. All the laws given at Sinai were laws made by God. Moses was just the mediator.
Rob
So, Jesus was a liar?: “ get away from me, I never knew you, you who are law breakers”.
The lawbreakers are those who are under the law which only Jesus could fully fulfill. So anyone claiming to be saved by the law is a liar. The saved are those who by faith believe that Jesus is the Messiah. If you do not accept Jesus as your Savior, since no one is saved by the law, you are headed to destruction.
@@georgehart8179 1 John 7..Little children, let no one deceive you, the one who PRACTICES
RIGHTEOUSNESS is RIGHTEOUS…the one who PRACTICES sin is of the devil…Got Torah Got Truth
Why would you claim Jesus is a liar? Abolish the thought!
@@docscantlin Jesus loathes pompous Pharisees
@@Say-hey24
Then why would you establish your faith on the vision of such a man?
Jesus fulfilled the law by faith, and by his death changed the covenant to get rid of its ordinances, which ended with the destruction of the Temple in AD70.
@@simonskinner1450 he did not by faith. Who said that? The law required explicitly works
Imagine you've been caught speeding and, according to the law, are required to pay the fine...
Someone steps up and pays your fine, thus "fulfilling" the requirement of the law.
Does this mean you can trot out of the courtroom and continue speeding?
What's wrong with people? It's so simple:
"Everyone doing sin also does Lawlessness, and sin is Lawlessness*." (1Jn 3:4)
*transgression of the Law
@TRINITYTVint The law, the Torah, required faith as first given to Abraham, and the Torah given to Moses.
@2besavedcom-7 I agree with you.
Jesus fulfilled the law by faith not the letter, he sanctified himself.
Jesus could not and did not pay for sins, he regained access to eternal life for everyone at the Cross, but only those in the covenant can be atoned fot their past sins at baptism.
There was no atonement directly at the Cross. I have a Ytube video series 'Myths in so-called Christianity' for NT truth
@@simonskinner1450yes there was atonement directly at the cross, and that for the whole world, but one cannot benefit from this atonement until the Spirit of God draws them to Christ.
1 John 2:2 (GB) And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.
Solberg: In fact, one of Matthew’s biggest goals in writing his gospel was to persuade his readers that Jesus is,
in fact, the promised Jewish Messiah who has come to fulfill the prophecies foretold in the Hebrew
Bible. He starts his book with that very claim. Chapter 1, verse 1: “The book of the genealogy
of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” He starts his book by linking Jesus
all the way back to Abraham. The NT is not a new story, it’s a continuation of the same story of
God that began in the Hebrew Bible.
*So, why would you push so hard to separate Christians from that foundation by trying to get rid of the Mosaic law: a portion of the Hebrew Bible Christ quoted from considerably. I mean, take Christ’s three temptations in Matthew 4, for example. Christ’s defense in those three cases are taken from Deuteronomy 6 and 8, heavily depending on what was written by Moses to defend himself against Satan’s advancements. If you detach Christians from the Old Covenant and law and the gospel from that law as well, you destroy the foundation on which Christ based his defense against Lucifer. So, if the NT is a continuation of the Hebrew Bible, and the gospel depends on referencing the Mosaic law,then trying to use the NT to create a wedge between the gospel and the Mosaic law would only harm the gospel. And this is another reason why Christ in the gospels does not instruct people to stop circumcising or to abandon the Mosaic law. Christ knows that would harm the gospel, even if you don’t yet grasp that, Professor.*
Solberg: And remember that the English word “Christ” essentially
Means Messiah.” So, in the first verse of his gospel, which is also the first verse of the NT, Matthew tells us that Jesus is the very Christ, the Messiah, who was prophesied to come from the
kingly line of David, and is the seed of Abraham. He's telling his Jewish readers,
this is your story. And he goes on to highlight the theme of fulfillment at every turn. There are
ten passages in Matthew where he formally points his readers directly to the fulfillment of the OT.
And there are nine other passages that informally speak of the fulfillment of OT prophecy. And
that’s an important piece of context for us to keep in mind when we get to our fulfillment passage in Matthew 5. Because that passage is part of Matthew’s overall mission to communicate
Christ’s fulfillment of the messianic promises and prophecies.
*But, what about the parts Christ said he was not able to fulfill, but would be fulfilled in the future? Christ in Matthew 23 admits openly he was not able to gather the people in fulfillment of the promise in Deuteronomy 30, but comes back in Matthew 24, admitting that that part of the law would not be fulfilled until the blowing of the trumpet at Christ’s second coming instead, when his angels gather his people from the ends of heaven? Then we can start talking about how his people will be gathered back into their own land to further fulfill Deuteronomy 30’s prophetic aims in line with Ezekiel 36 which speaks of the same thing. And how god will circumcise their heart in Deuteronomy 30 and Ezekiel 44 and remove their stony heart to give them a new heart in Ezekiel 36, again well into our future. Suggesting man still has a stony heart and isn’t quite under the New Covenant yet, because he doesn’t even have a new heart yet to prepare him to be under that future covenant. You see, the Mosaic law remains quite relevant until well after Christ’s second coming, Professor. And that is the part you are missing in all of this as you seek to teach people to separate themselves from the Mosaic law which is still quite relevant and still being fulfilled . This is why Christ never claims that you are no longer under the Mosaic law, because Christ is fully aware it is still in effect well into our future.
I suggest you get your own channel. Rob has stated more than once that he doesn’t have time to read these long winded posts.
Solberg: And, in addition to explicit prophetic
fulfillment, Matthew also often teaches the fulfillment of the OT through typology, which is
when the biblical authors interpret OT events and people and institutions as “types” that foreshadow
things in the NT. And some of these are easy to miss from our modern perspective. For example,
Matthew portrays Jesus as a new Moses through a sort of indirect presentation that would have been
much more obvious to his first-century Jewish readers because they were waiting on the Messiah.
So he taps into imagery and language from passages like Deuteronomy 18 where Moses prophesied:
“The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him…I will raise up for them a prophet like you
from among their fellow Israelites, and I will put my words in his mouth. He will tell them
everything I command him. I myself will call to account anyone who does not listen to my words
that the prophet speaks in my name.” Matthew’s first-century Jewish readers understood this as a
prophecy about the Messiah. This is the messianic figure that they were anticipating and waiting for.
*But, this is precisely why none of Christ’s true followers will seek to release themselves from the authority of the Mosaic law, because this portion of the Mosaic law is the foundation on which the gospel itself rests and gains all its authority. When you say silly things like, “Christians are no longer bound to the Old Covenant and law of Moses”, you are trying to destroy the authority on which the above Mosaic law’s directive binds us to the authority and words of Christ as given to him by his Father. You are telling Christians that they are not obligated to obey Christ when you do that whether you realize it or not. You are separating them from the above directive God gave concerning Christ. You are wrong for doing that, Professor. Completely wrong! You are tampering with a foundation you do not well understand. What god says above makes the gospel itself an extention of the Mosaic law. And those who realize that can better understand why those who get the victory over the beast and his image in Revelation 15 stand on the sea of glass and sing the song of Moses and the Lamb: the two prophets of Deuteronomy 18-both of which whose teachings are still quite relevant and still being fulfilled.
The gospel is not trying to detach us from the law of Moses, it is trying to draw us to the law of Moses so that we will have the protection we need when the beast and its image starts imposing the mark in the right hand and foreheads of those who do not heed the third angel’s message of Revelation 14.
God is attempting in fulfillment of Isaiah 8:16 to bind up the testimony to the right hand of his people, and seal the law in the forheads of his disciples. Which is why four verses later, God says those who speak contrary to the law and testimony have no light in them and then continues through verse 22 to explain how they will curse God and king and be driven to darkness. They are not sealed like Christ and his most diligent followers are. Because laws like Deuteronomy 6 instruct God’s people to bind his commandments and law to their right hand and forehead in anticipation of what is coming in Revelation 14. Why do you think the beast is trying to replace that specific law of Moses with the mark of the beast instead, Professor? Do you think that is just a random coincidence? Check out Revelation 14:12, because those who are identified as God’s people keep the commandments of God and also have the faith of Jesus (again the combination of the teachings from Moses and the Lamb): the song sung by those who get the victory during this time and end up safely on the sea of glass.
Stop attacking the relationship between God’s people and the Mosaic law, Professor. You are trying to harm and get innocent people killed when you do that. You are not helping things here but doing a lot of needless damage. I wish I could say your teachings are simply misguided, but your attack on the Mosaic law is so intentional that it is like you are trying to cause people to mess up purposely. Lucifer is waging war on the remnant in Revelation 12:17: those who keep the commandments of God (the writings of Moses) and the testimony of Jesus (the gospel of the Lamb). The signature of Moses and the Lamb is purposely hidden throughout the book of Revelation to help God’s people know that their pastors and teachers who have been speaking against Moses are simplyworking on Lucifer’s side of the war effort, not helping God’s people to properly navigate this dangerous time of end time Bible prophecy.
Did you even watch the video?
@@nicoarnold2200
@nicoarnold2200
1 hour ago
Did you even watch the video?
*I sit through a lot of his videos, some more than others, but I tend to prefer to sit down and read the transcript of his videos. I get to reason through his arguments far more carefully when doing that, and I quote his own words when responding to him to boot.
We should not confuse the law. Clarify the people what law Jesus was talking about. DO NOT STEAL IS A LAW IR NOT? IT IS. AS A CHRISTIAN I CAN NOW BREAK ANY COMMANDMENT UNDER THE PRETEXT THAT I DO NOT LIVE UNDER THE LAW. AS PREACHERS WE SHOULD LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT THE LAW JESUS TOOK OUT WAS THE CERIMONIAL LAW. THE MATRIMONIAL LAW AND THE MORAL LAW REMAIN INTACT AND ALL FOLLOWER'S OF JESUS ARE UNDER THE MORAL AND MATRIMONIAL LAWS. THAT WHY JESUS SAID NO TO DIVORCE. JESUS ABOLISHES THE SABBATH LAW. WE MUST BE SPECIFIC ON WHAT JESUS ABOLISHED AND WHAT HE DID NOT ABOLISH.
Because Yeshua is eternal, He kept the law perfectly (He fulfilled it)
And since he lives forever, He will live longer than heaven and earth passing away.
Therefore no jot, no tittle will pass from the law. Ever. Because he is eternal.
And his righteousness becomes our righteousness. : )
You're saying there has been no change at all, not even down to the jot and tittle. So, are we still required to sacrifice animals to atone for our sin?
Rob
Solberg: Grant Osborne writes this, “Matthew sees all three sections of
the Old Testament-the Law, the Writings, and the Prophets-fulfilled in Jesus. He has completed
their expectations and fully interpreted their meaning.”
*The problem with Grant Osborn is that he is sadly wrong! Christ himself says Grant Osborn was wrong the moment Christ admits he could not gather the people in Matthew 23 back at his first coming to fulfill that prophetic portion of Deuteronomy 30. And Christ further proves Grant to be wrong by placing the gathering of Deuteronomy 30 well into our future at the blowing of the trumpet at Christ’s second coming in Matthew 24.
And how could Christ fulfill all the expectations of the prophecies of the Old Testament when prophecies like Isaiah 63 concern what Christ will do at his second coming. Christ never came with died garments from Bozrah from treading the winefat. Even John after the cross places that into our future.
Rev 19:15 - And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
When is the heaven rolled up like a scroll from Isaiah 34? John in the sixth seal of Revelation 6 says that is taking place at Christ’s second coming too.
Isaiah 65 and 66 speak of the New heaven and New Earth. That didn’t come into being at Christ’s first coming. Christ came back to John in Revelation 21:1 and showed him that was well into our future as well.
So, Grant Osborn has a nice sounding theory, but it is pattently wrong. What Christ fulfilled back at his first coming were all the particulars concerning his first coming from the law and prophets, not the details concerning his second coming like in Isaiah 59 when Christ returns to the earth at the end of that chapter of prophecy too. The problem is that Grant Osborn doesn’t know prophecy very well if he is making silly assertions like he made above. Sorry, but he is just wrong. There is no easy way to say it but to say it like it truly is, Professor.
Hi Corey. Osbourne's comment was actually made in the context of the earthly ministry of Christ. And if you listen carefully to this video, I did not say Jesus fulfilled *_all_* the messianic prophecies. I said I take His statement "all is accomplished" as referring to the prophecies about His earthly ministry. And He fulfilled hundreds of those prophecies.
A bigger concern I want to share with you is your pervasive attempts to scour our videos for every "iota and dot" you disagree with. First of all, thank you for spending so much time pouring over my teachings! To set your expectations properly, I am far from perfect and don't know everything. So I'm sure you'll find some errors and misstatements and such. And I'm always grateful for correction when I get things wrong.
More importantly, I'm concerned you're missing the forest for the trees. It's obvious from your numerous long posts that you approach my teachings in a spirit of divisiveness, dissension, and criticism rather than openly and charitably. It's certainly your right to approach them that way, but I think you're missing a really good opportunity to learn and grow as a believer. I'm not suggesting you have to agree with everything I say. (I certainly don't agree with everything I hear or read from other teachers!) But it seems to me your caustic approach may be robbing you of some benefit.
Also, I've mentioned this before, but I don't have time to read comments of more than about 250 words. Which means I end up skipping past most of your long diatribes.
Blessings,
Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots
@TheBiblicalRoots
3 hours ago
Hi Corey. Osbourne's comment was actually made in the context of the earthly ministry of Christ.
*Insisting that to be the case only reinforces why his opening claim is pattently incorrect, Professor. Here, let’s consider what he actually said.
“Grant Osborne writes this, “Matthew sees all three sections of
the Old Testament-the Law, the Writings, and the Prophets-fulfilled in Jesus.”
If that all encompassing statement by Grant were an accurate claim, I wouldn’t have been able to find a single issue that lacked fulfillment in any of the above stated sections of the Old Testament, because all three of those sections of the Old Testament would have been fulfilled in Jesus as the above claim sets forth. But, I demonstrated multiple counter examples to that faulty claim, and there are a lot more where those came from to boot. It helps to understand that not all prophetic fulfillments depend solely on what Christ does, because Christ isn’t the only focus of fulfilled prophecy. He may be an important focus, andmay even be the most important focus of numerous prophecies, but there are many prophecies that are about things other than Christ. And so, the overzealous claims of many theologians tends to be nauseating when they blow things so completely far out of proportion that they miss the point and mislead others along the way. Many prophecies are fulfilled in what other people do too. Christ is not the depiction of Lucifer in Zechariah 3. Christ is not the statue of Daniel 2. Christ is not the four beasts of Daniel 7, nor the little horn of Daniel 7:25, Christ is not the strangers of Isaiah 56, Christ is not the lion of Joel 1, nor is he the four insects in that chapter either. So, to expect that all three sections of the Old Testament mentioned above would be fulfilled in Jesus is an unrealistic expectation to begin with designed to distort the very purpose and meaning of numerous prophecies.
Grant continued: “He has completed
their expectations…”
How can that be when many prophecies from the earlier three sections of the Old Testament are not even fulfilled yet? This latter idea is a victim of Grant’s former faulty claim. And I know why Grant and others talk like this, because they worry that if they give the impression that something-especially as it concerns the Mosaic law-was not fulfilled back on the cross, then that will give folks like the Hebrew Roots fuel to say that the Mosaic law is still in effect until all is fulfilled as Christ’s words in Matthew 5:18 declare. You can haggle over what you hope those words mean in Matthew 5:18, but that doesn’t mean they will agree with your interpretation of those words. And that makes it all the more dangerous to let unfulfilled portions of the law reach beyond the cross, because I can see from the sheer number of videos you have putout through the life of your channel how much of an investment you have undertaken to attempt to separate the Hebrew Roots from the Mosaic law. It’s not as easy as you thought it would be, is it Professor?
Grant: “…and fully interpreted their meaning.”
*And where did Christ fully interpret the meaning of all three sections of the law, writings and prophets he supposedly fulfilled from Grant’s original claim? Seeing this was isolated to the perspective of Matthew, we would either have to believe Matthew 28 is missing numerous chapters of explanations from Christ on such matters, or that Grant is flying by the seat of his pants here hoping no one is paying attention to the exaggerated nature of his claims above.*
Solberg: And if you listen carefully to this video, I did not say Jesus fulfilled all the messianic prophecies.
I said I take His statement "all is accomplished" as referring to the prophecies about His earthly ministry. And He fulfilled hundreds of those prophecies.
*I think you may have read more into my response to Grant’s quote there than was actually there. I was directing my comments to what Grant was claiming in that response, not necessarily to how your view may agree or differ from what Grant was claiming.*
Solberg: A bigger concern I want to share with you is your pervasive attempts to scour our videos for every "iota and dot" you disagree with. First of all, thank you for spending so much time pouring over my teachings! To set your expectations properly, I am far from perfect and don't know everything. So I'm sure you'll find some errors and misstatements and such. And I'm always grateful for correction when I get things wrong
*Well, I don’t just pour over your videos, I actually sit down and read your transcripts. I take considerable time to try and appreciate what it is you are saying and what it is you hope to achieve in all of this. And when it comes to being pervasive with your own comments, you have exhibited that tendency with the abundance of directed videos criticizing those in the Hebrew Roots movement. So, fair is fair, right? If you can’t take a little combing criticism, maybe this isn’t the work for you. But, if you are going to invest this much time and effort into isolating and criticizing a specific group of believers for what they believe and pointing out why you think they are in the wrong, don’t be surprised if others do the same with the things you share with the public-especially when people think that what you believe is not on target. Because the number of videos you have created to address and attack the foundation of the Hebrew Roots movement could easily be construed as an assault, if not a crusade of some kind. And that is especially the case when people imagine you to be abusing or even twisting the meaning of Scripture to achieve certain outcomes. I know you may not see it that way, but that doesn’t mean they don’t see it that way, Professor. And you have been at this for a long time targeting this group, but you find my few critical comments to your presentations to be disturbing in comparison? I think there is an old saying that goes something like, “People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”*
Solberg: More importantly, I'm concerned you're missing the forest for the trees. It's obvious from your numerous long posts
*Hey, have you seen the length of some of your own videos and their associated transcripts? Just saying!*
Solberg: that you approach my teachings in a spirit of divisiveness, dissension, and criticism rather than openly and charitably.
*That’s rich coming from the very man who waged a multi-year campaign of videos dedicated to uprooting and dismantling the Hebrew Roots community and what they believe. Now you want to play the victim? LOL! Are you trying to make me laugh here, or what exactly?*
Solberg: It's certainly your right to approach them that way, but I think you're missing a really good opportunity to learn and grow as a believer.
*By studying and questioning you and your beliefs just like you are doing to the Hebrew Roots? LOL! Professor, you drug me out here into the weeds, because you didn’t have a good strategy in hand to face me on the issues. If you think that isn’t exceedingly clear to me at this point, then you have underestimated me far more than you realize.*
Solberg: I'm not suggesting you have to agree with everything I say. (I certainly don't agree with everything I hear or read from other teachers!) But it seems to me your caustic approach may be robbing you of some benefit.
*What robs me of benefit, Professor, is when I send you good questions that you actually need to honestly address, and instead you pull crap like this, ignoring my concerns like the plague. What that tells me is that you are not serious and not prepared to handle your view being challenged.*
Solberg: Also, I've mentioned this before, but I don't have time to read comments of more than about 250 words.
*But, you have all kinds of time to ignore my questions and concerns, drag me out here in the weeds, get yourself in way over your head, pretending you have the skill to psycholanalyze me for lack of any real strategy? This was a failed plan of your’s too, Professor. That should tell you something about your own approach that needs serious work. LOL! Let me help you to save yourself tons of time. The weeds is not where you want to take people when you value your time, Professor. This time could have been better spent discussing quality ideas, but that was never your intention, was it? Do you begin to understand how disingenuous your statement is above once that cat is out of the bag?*
Solberg: Which means I end up skipping past most of your long diatribes.
*I know you do! It’s because you want to spend far more time with posts like this, dragging us away from the issues of importance, so you can try to show me how skilled you are at getting in way over your head out here in the weeds over nothing of any real value or consequence.
(I know it’s a study but)
You explained your preferred use of “fulfilled” for prophesies but not for the law..
You can’t bring a law to its completion by doing it..
I can’t show love to you and then BAM that law is completed,
and I don’t have to worry about Showing love anymore… not biblical
Paul (Romans 13:8-9) taught how to fulfill laws dealing with others..
In 1 Corinthians 7, he also taught how to obey Torah laws about marriage…
So if Paul taught how to follow torah Then is must have not come to a completion as you think..
And if prophesies tells us we’re doing sacrifices in the kingdom…
Again the law must have not been completed as you think.
BUT Another definition (that actually gels with the passage) for fulfill is to fully preach/teach and
thats exactly what Christ did.
He says those who >>teach
I hear you, F1S. And I agree that a law cannot be "fulfilled" in the sense of being "brought to completion." As I said in this video, in Matt. 5:18, I don't believe Jesus is making a legal statement about the old covenant commandments, per se. He’s speaking about the fulfillment of OT messianic prophecies and "types." And in fulfilling the things in the OT that pointed to Him-for example, the blood sacrifices required for sin atonement-He brought them to an end. And that includes many old covenant laws. We provided many Scriptural examples of this in the video.
"The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming-not the realities themselves" (Heb. 10:1)
Shalom!
Rob
@ ahh ok, something to think about, shadows always point to the “object” it derived from. Like the passover… it points BACK to Christ…
Also, the blood of bulls and goats never took away sins and made us prefect, it only pointed to Christ… with this understanding, prophecies about sacrifices, in the kingdom makes more sense biblically.
Tectonics I did watch the video. My understanding of the Bible is so simple . Prov 28 :13 says he that caovereth his sins shake not prosper ( eternally) BUT HE THAT CONFESSES AND FORSAKES his sin( disobedience to God) will.have mercy or forgiveness. What the good Dr is doing is makting the Bible contradict itself . By twisting the Bible to NOT obey God and reject His law Because Christ came to fulfil it ( obey it not destroy it) is not what Paul or any of the Apostles wrote . Paul said he established the law . John said we are liars if we say we know God and don't keep His commands . Peter said we are like pigs if we turn from the Holy commandment after having recieved and are back in the pig manure of sin after Jesus has washed and cleansed us from all our unrighteousness and it would be better for us not to have known the path of righteousness . All that was said contradicts all these Biblw writers . Saul was the king of excuses for NOT obeying God and God took the kingdom off him . There are lessons here for us .. obedience is the condition for Jesus to give back eternal life that was lost through disobedience Gen 2:16 ,17 Rev 22: 14. People are making excuses to die eternally Rom 6;23 CRAZY!!!!!
Tektronics . Jesus said we must become as little children. If a child could understand all this theological gymnastics yhen no one would be entering heaven . Jesus has graciously asked us to keep His commands and HIS WORDS John 14: 15 , 23, 24.. This is what a child can understand otherwise only Drs of Divinity would be saved .conjecture or surmising won't save anyone . Good scholars have already translated the Bible . I just read and heed what it tells me to do for my eternal.salvation . This is not hard to understand
@@EricHort-cx1jp You're SDA, so your understanding of the Gospel is NOT simple & involves the Great Controversy, the 3 Angels Message, the 7-step Sanctuary System, the Investigative Judgment & Sinless Perfectionism.
The eternal.law in brief is NOT to be nasty mean and unkind to our nieghbores and obedient to our Creator . WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT??? A sinner cannot keep a holy law so God helps out by creating in us a new heart Ezek 36: 24- 27 , we are connected to the True Vine and bear HID FRUIT NOT OURS .and are partakers of the divine nature to escape the corruptions that are in the world . When Jesus is living in us Gal 2:20 we abhor our past sins . If there is no abhorance for sin Jesus is NOT living IN us . Sin is and always will.ne transgression of the moral.law the law we will all be judged by . No where in the Bible is there an excuse for deliberate wilful sinning . Quite the opposite Heb 10: 26, 27. Even though we are born sinners it does not give us the right or 3xcuse for sinning. 1Pet 2: 11 says to ABSTAIN from sin through the power and grace of Jesus who died to save us from it . Jesus died in vain if we keep on sinning and it will incur the indignation and wrath of God against sin Gal 3: 13 Rev 14: 10 . God has a right to be indignant with anyone who thinks Jesus (His Son) died to make excuses for sin amd sanction our rebellion against Gods kingdom ..Jesus died for nothing and may as well have stayed in heaven and left us to our fate
I think his 'literal' interpretation of 'heaven and earth' passing away as a future eschatological event referring to the physical earth and, a what, I don't know, heaven, is erroneous. Heaven and earth passing, being shaken, burned or rolled up was biblical language often used to describe the destruction of a socio-political or governmental system during the ruin of its city or nation. Israel's heaven and earth was the Law. What 5:18 is saying is that the Law and its temple cultus stands until all OT prophecy is fulfilled. When is that? All prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70, "For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." Luke 21:22
Thanks, Mr. Murfle! I get what you're saying and I largely agree with you. However, I did want to point out that there are still OT prophecies yet to be fulfilled. For example those about the second coming of the Messiah, complete global peace, etc.
Blessings,
Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots For starters, when did Jesus say He would return? Answer: In His generation (Mt 24:34) and in the lifetime of some standing there with Him (Mt 16:28). Put together with other biblical data, that makes AD70 extremely compelling.
New Covenant Theology,Theonomy and the Hebrew/Jewish roots commit the same doctrinal error. They deny the threefold division of the law
@@salpezzino7803 The threefold division isn't a doctrine error because it's not in scripture but comes out of systematic theology. Jesus, Paul etc. all referred to The Law, or The Law and the Prophets or Law , Prophets and writings. They don't make a distinction between ceremonial, civil and moral. They're all God's Law and Israel had a moral obligation being under that covenant to keep all of them.
@@Kenn-rb7gq like I said your doctrine is in error.
Are you in the Hebrew/Jewish roots Cult?
@@Kenn-rb7gq Romans 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them
Romans 1:21
Paul says that people knew God exists but refused to worship him, which teaches that the worship of God is a moral imperative
@@salpezzino7803 No I'm definitely not in that cult ... I'm in loose agreement with most of New Covenant Theology though. If I had to put myself in a theological camp that would be it..
@@Kenn-rb7gq Ok, New Covenant Theology wont last long
Dear Professor Solberg. If what you say were true, Jesus would have violated the Torah:
Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Matthew responds to accusations of his time that claim Jesus taught apostasy, that Jews should not keep the Torah. Luke also addressed it in the book of Acts where Paul had to defend himself against the same accusation that he teaches Jews not to circumcise their children.
The statement of Matthew 5:17 follows the beatitudes which to some might have sounded that he is abolishing the law. He also had many run-ins with the Pharisees which some might have viewed as him opposing them with new ideas about the Torah. Jesus had to clarify that he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfil it.
Now your claim that Matthew uses the word pleroo, fulfilment, as fulfilling or bringing something to an end is true in many passages. Yet it lacks the reference to what it is actually fulfilling. He doesn’t point to a specific scripture like he does in the other passages. And if you say it being a general reference to all the scriptures, you have a problem, because so far apart from maybe Isaiah 53, there’s no messianic prophecy fulfilled. That’s why Christians believe in a second coming.
So even if your reading were true, since Jesus hasn’t fulfilled all the prophetic prophecies yet concerning the messiah the law of Moses still stands and must be obeyed. Sorry, check mate 😜
Hi RL.
Deut. 4:2 is a command for the Israelites, not for God. Jesus added many new things to the Torah (e.g. Matt. 28:19-20), which He can do because He is God. But even if Jesus spoke those words as a mere human, how does saying He "did not come to abolish the law but fulfill it" violate Deut. 4:2? It doesn't.
Also, if you listen carefully, I never said Jesus fulfilled *_all_* the messianic prophecies. I said he was referring to the prophecies about His earthly ministry, and He fulfilled hundreds of those prophecies:
www.newtestamentchristians.com/bible-study-resources/351-old-testament-prophecies-fulfilled-in-jesus-christ/
Best,
RL
@@TheBiblicalRoots Amen!!
@@TheBiblicalRoots I did not say Jesus violated the Torah by saying he fulfilled it. Jews say they fulfil the Torah, they don’t mean that they fulfil prophecies but that they keep the commandments of Moses.
I’m not quite sure what hundreds of prophecies you refer to in the TeNaCh Jesus fulfilled. There are only a very few one can refer to Jesus like those of the suffering servant. I agree yet I also agree with the Jews who say the suffering servant refers to Israel. As king of the Jews Jesus represented Israel.
Concerning Matthew 28:19-20 I fail to see how they are new commandments. He’s not adding to the Torah nor diminishing it. What Jesus does is giving a personal instruction on how to share the Torah with the rest of the world.
Now the Torah applies different for gentiles than Jews, yet every iota and tittle must be taught and applied. This is what Jesus commanded.
@@TheBiblicalRoots and concerning your link, I really can’t take it serious. I would have expected better from you. It’s a silly list that desperately tries to read things into the TeNaCh that isn’t actually there. Nearly all of those so called prophecies can be easily refuted and have already been done so by many.
I do believe that Jesus was anointed to be the next king of Israel, the messiah, and that he was rejected and crucified. I also believe that he rose again, although scripture is unclear how exactly this happened since Paul didn’t believe in a physical resurrection and his letters precede the gospels.
Jesus actually refers to something completely different. He says that Moses wrote about him yet there is not a single reference in Moses about a virgin birth, about the seed of David, about the anointed one being rejected, being crucified and resurrected after three days. So what exactly did Jesus mean?
Only Paul makes a clear association with Jesus and Adam, Jesus being the second Adam. Yet Paul makes statements that don’t add up, like pointing to seed being singular, when it actually isn’t, referring to Abraham’s offspring:
Galatians 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
This makes no sense as seed in Hebrew is singular and plural the same word.
This is just one example of the many mischiefs being perpetrated against the TeNaCh, making it say things it actually doesn’t say.
A few things.
1. Jeff Benner teaches that the law is still in effect.
2. Some of the prophecies were also fulfilled in the time of the prophets or near that time frame, so I don't find the fulfilled argument that convincing.
3. The most convincing parts are from Paul's writings. I have been looking at the website "Jesus Words Only" and while I don't agree with his Unitarian ideas, he has me pretty convinced that Paul is a false apostle, so I don't find the Pauline arguments that strong. Likewise, Jeff Benner also uses Paul to explain how Paul is still upholding the law. IMO Paul seems to say contradicting things to even himself.
So I think it would be most convincing the hear Jesus explain how he got rid of the law. It doesn't seem the be the understanding of the apostles at all when they are mentioned in Acts. Near the end of Acts, they make Paul basically swear that he still upholds the law and he does so. So it seems like everyone understood that the law was still in effect. Again, people like Jeff Benner actually go through Paul's letters to explain how they still keep the law in effect and that Paul is essentially arguing that the law is not a salvation issue.
tbh I'm not 100% following the not bring peace, but a sword = the law is abolished. Jesus didn't come to bring peace, but he gave it to the disciples and those who believe, but everyone else got a sword and even the disciples were split apart from other people who rejected Jesus. So I just don't see how we say "yes Jesus did come to bring peace" Jesus will bring peace on earth -- just like the heavens and the earth will pass away. Jesus' context in that situation is that he is sending out the disciples and that they will be rejected in different towns and he is telling them that it is ok. That they aren't to disbelieve Jesus because Jesus didn't come to be accepted by everyone, but that he is going to be divisive. So the implication of the context is immediately true. Just like Jesus says that he didn't come to abolish the law, but fulfill it and then immediately taught the law and how it should be interpreted: with righteousness exceeding the pharisees -- because the pharisees were not righteous, but only externally righteous (while dead on the inside) and had false teachings like everyone who is an Israelite will be saved or that you can't heal someone on the sabbath. They didn't know God or the law and they were workers of lawlessness.
As I see it, the law still stands, but we are not saved by it, but we should be obedient to it. As most of us are gentiles, we are not called to follow many things, but we should still look to it and there is a lot of understanding on how to obey the two greatest commandments by looking at the spirit of the other commandments even if we aren't under most of them. And I'd add that I would love to live under a nation that follow the law. I find Paul's arguments against the law stupid. The law was given by angels? So that means that we don't follow it anymore? That doesn't agree with the Bible, but even if it did, that still doesn't make any sense why it would be abolished.
I would really appreciate you debating with "Jesus Words Only" because I have been listening to that website/channel and I am finding it more and more convincing.
"As I see it" BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
Hi, Purple.
1. I didn’t quote Brenner regarding the law.
2. I was speaking specifically of messianic prophecies. None of those prophecies were fulfilled until Jesus.
3. Jesus said this about the Apostle Paul: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel” (Acts 9:15). And Jesus said, “Whoever receives the one I send receives me” (John 13:20). So, to reject Paul is to reject Jesus who sent him.
-Rob
You have followers because people prefer the LIES of deception. Isa 30:9. In Mt.5:19 Christ implores us to DO rather than BREAK His commandments. Saints are the heaven bound Christians who KEEP the COMMANDMENTS of God. Rev.14:12. 22:14. KJV. That's why the law is written in our hearts. Heb. 10:16. Jer.31:31-33. Ez.36:26-27. The law is the transcript of the character of God, how could you abolish it. without eliminating Him in our hearts. How could we obey God away from keeping the law of salvation. Heb.5:9 . With grace we are NO longer UNDER THE LAw means grace has enabled us to be AT PAR or EQUAL with the law. Gal 5:18. This means the Spirit of grace enables us to be as spiritual as the law so that we could keep it. Rom.7:14; 8:1-7.
I take it you're SDA?
You do know most people are unfamiliar with the "Great Controversy" whereby Christians are tasked with vindicating the character of God against the accusations of Satan, because it's not in the Bible, but rather was lifted from John Milton's "Paradise Lost"?
The Law Fulfilled: A Study of Matthew 5:17-20
Just 30 seconds into this video you state that the standard Hebrew Roots understanding of this passage would contradict many other parts of the New Testament. The fact is it doesn’t, it simply contradicts your interpretation of those New Testament passages, Which by the way contradicts the entirety of scripture, to be fair.
Yes Jesus is the promised Prophet from Deut. 18, however your belief about him causes your personal Jesus to qualify as the false Prophet of Deut. 13, you can’t have it both ways. Jesus is the Prophet like unto Moses just like the time Moses told everyone they don’t need to keep all the Commands of God… wait that never happened… The entire unleavened law of God came through Moses. Yep and as soon as he called them out of Egypt he delivered to them his Law, Just like in Luke 2 when Jesus was 12 after himself coming out from Egypt.
The Lost Sheep of the House of Israel is the Northern 10 tribes of Israel. Matt 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Lost by divorce and exile, brought near again by the death of the husband articulated by Paul in Romans 7. His ministry didn’t expand, Lost Israelites were already in every nation around the world Deut. 28:64 and Jesus taught them to teach all nations all things whatsoever he commanded them, which is all the Commands of God, which again if it were anything else he would be the false prophet of Deut. 13.
If Matthew’s writing this under the influence of the Holy Spirit, it’s not just some amalgamation of what Matthew thinks is important. Ok so if it seems like Jesus is saying the Law will not pass away ‘till, that’s because this was written for Jewish eyes only… yeah no, God’s not racist, everyone gets the same penny.
You say Matthew 5:17 is stand alone and can’t be compared with other scripture, but somehow, you’re confident to say Jesus is referring to specific passages from the Law and Prophets concerning “Messianic prophecies” and not the entirety of the Law and Prophets. Let’s look at that… Oh we can’t take anything Jesus said literally when it seems like he’s suggesting we should keep the entire Law until the earth blows up… Actually no eyeball or hand or anything in this life is worth the Kingdom, yeah cut it off, it really is that important literally!!! Why don’t you think Jesus will give you what you ask for? Oh I think I know why, here let’s read what Jesus said rather than arrogantly denying his word. John 14: 14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. 15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. There it is, You don’t want to keep his commandments, you don’t want him to do what you ask. The machine isn’t broken, you have to plug it in. You will get your candy, but you have to put in your quarter. Stop thinking God is all things unconditional, And Jesus wasn’t serious because you can’t read or follow simple instructions! That whole last little bit you said trying to establish doubt was borderline blasphemy. So let’s say you’re right 17 is talking exclusively about specific Messianic prophecies, and 18 is referencing those prophecies, then in 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. So whosoever denies the death, burial, and resurrection is getting into the Kingdom, but they’re called least, but they get in, but they deny Jesus, but they get in, but without faith no one can be saved, but they got in… You see, going back to your first assumption is he talking about The entirety of the Law and Prophets, or exclusively specific messianic prophecies. One way all followers of Jesus are expected to keep the entire law, the other has people in the kingdom who deny the blood of Christ. As I said at the beginning of my comment: the standard Hebrew Roots understanding of this passage would contradict many other parts of the New Testament. The fact is it doesn’t, it simply contradicts your interpretation of those New Testament passages, Which by the way contradicts the entirety of scripture, to be fair.
Came not to bring peace, but a sword. Jesus is speaking of himself, who he is, what he stood for, what he taught, the plumbline that he set down. Everyone will find themselves on one side or the other concerning him. Jesus is not willing to compromise truth for the sake of unity. The few, and the many.
I am only contradicting your misunderstanding of Pauls words, you’re contradicting the entirety of scripture.
A change in the Law is not equal to something passing/removed from the law. Jesus is the priest, Jesus blood is the sacrifice, I am the Temple of God, the Spirit dwells within me. The one thing you always point to is in full effect. Is your testimony that Jesus is not your high priest, his blood is not a sufficient sacrifice, the Holy Spirit does not dwell within you, you are not the Temple of God??? Your Testimony is the most important thing you got, you will be judged based on it, and Satan is a crafty prosecuting attorney.
Useless because God is no longer accepting animal sacrifice, in fact it’s an insult and denial of the deity of Jesus Christ. After the resurrection of Jesus the ongoing continuation of animal sacrifices is referred to by Daniel as “the overspreading of abominations” animal sacrifices now are an abomination because they are a direct denial of Jesus. If I deny the validity of the one Torah portion that Jesus uses to forgive me of my inevitable ongoing sins and failures, I don’t believe he’s obligated to extend forgiveness to me.
Let no man judge you, but the body of Christ (the church)
Under the law means in debt to the law. Paul had no debt to the Law, he was forgiven his sins by the blood of Jesus, simply making himself relatable. Paul also says “unto the Jews I became a Jew) he was a Jew! Sometimes I think you misunderstand Paul on purpose. Paul was speaking of people who were of the circumcision party who thought circumcision was the most important thing and you didn’t need anything else. Acts 15 is not an exhaustive list, the real question is why was there any list at all, if the Torah is done away with… and those were gentiles! Ephesians 2:15 ordinances is the G1378 Dogma you know that, why are you still trying to trick anyone??? In debt to the Guardian, Jesus forgives us. Romans 7 Law of husband, law of divorce and remarriage… Why when the Bible speaks of the entire Law you want to make it about a specific law? But when it talks a specific law you want to make it about the entire Law??? Led by the Spirit you will not sin, therefore have no debt to the law.
Can’t be harmonized??? You have Jesus deniers in the Kingdom of Heaven!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Peace
Thanks Minnesota! You helped to prove my point by elucidating exactly the kind of careless, flawed, dangerous, and unbiblical “Torah-keeping” theology I was referring to in this video.
Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots I know you are, but what am I? Rather than a feeble attempt at discrediting me or my argument, try explaining why your belief system causes you to teach all these fine people how those who deny the blood of Christ find themselves in the Kingdom of God. Just back up and take another run at it :)
Peace
@@minnesota630 Those who deny the blood of Christ will not find themselves in the Kingdom of God.
Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots So you're retracting this video? I watched it carefully.
Defending biblical roots seriously? Respectfully, you should first know the scriptures before you mention fulfilling the law which is a ridiculous claim and very contradictory statement. What about Ezekiel 37??
He has a video on that :)
What’s ridiculous about repeating what Jesus said in Matt 5:17-18?
Satan loves the work you do
Shitlom
Wow, there so many errors and problems with this horrible explanation it's hard to even know where to start.
1st- Nowhere in the OT is the torah ever described as being temporary or having a designed end. It's ALWAYS described as "eternal", "everlasting", "for ALL generations", "the Levites shall ***NEVER**** lack a man in my presence to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings, and to make sacrifices ****forever****.”
This list could go on and on. And PS, let's nip this in the bud, Jesus was NOT a Levite, so don't get that twisted.
2nd- Only Jews have to follow the Torah!!! Gentiles never had to follow the Torah, which is why in ACTS 15 the huge debate WAS NOT IF THE JEWS SHOULD BE FOLLOWING THE TORAH, but if the ****GENTILES**** had to follow the Torah. This is huge!!!!
3rd- if the interpretation of Jesus in Matthew is that the law was done and fulfilled at his death, than why the heck would the disciples, who were with him constantly for 3 years and who were supposed to have the Holy Spirit guiding them into all truth, ARGUING IN ACTS 15 ABOUT WHETHER THE ****GENTILES**** HAD TO KEEP THE LAW!
It's obvious that the early Jewish church in Jerusalem was Torah observant and the problem was not whether Jews had to continue observing the law, but whether gentiles had to. And the Jerusalem council didn't even say NO to keeping the law, they STILL MADE even the gentiles keep SOME of the law, which again flies in the face of the claim that the law was done away with at the end of Jesus' life.
Thanks Jeremy.
1.) God always knew that the Israelites would not keep His law and would break His covenant. "And the Lord said to Moses: 'You are going to rest with your ancestors, and these people will soon prostitute themselves to the foreign gods of the land they are entering. They will forsake me and break the covenant I made with them.'" (Deut. 31:16)
Also, the Torah says, “This shall be a statute *_forever_* for you, that atonement may be made for the people of Israel once in the year because of all their sins” (Lev 16:34). But the NT later says “There is no longer any offering for sin” (Heb. 10:18). So, are the law's sin sacrifices forever, or have they ended? Well, the Hebrew word translated “forever” in Lev 16:34 is עוֹלָ֗ם (olam). And while it can mean “forever,” it’s also regularly used to refer to an “unknown duration of time.” For example, Exodus 21:6 says, “he shall be his slave forever (olam).” Which obviously refers to the rest of the person’s life, not eternity. (See also: Exod. 14:13, 21:6; Deut 15:17; 1 Sam. 1:22, 2:35, 20:23, 27:12, 28:2, 1 Chron. 28:4). Because of the work of Jesus, we know that when Lev 16:34 said that sin sacrifices are to last _olam,_ it could not have meant literally "forever." It meant until Christ, who was our atoning sacrifice for sin, “once for all” (Heb. 10:10) And now, “There is no longer any offering for sin.” (Heb. 10:18)
2.) Are you suggesting God has two different standards of obedience for His people?!
3.) The NT shows all kinds of disciples and apostles-who were living in the first days of the new covenant-confused about what was required. Even Peter was so confused that both Jesus (Acts 10) and Paul (Gal 2) had to correct him. In fact, most of the epistles in the NT were written to help clear up the confusion among early believers.
Rob
@@TheBiblicalRoots Thanks for taking the time to respond.
1. Yes, the OT is clear that the sin sacrifices are forever and that the levitical priesthood would NEVER lack a priest and make sacrifices FOREVER. The problem is that you're using the books that MAKE the claim that the sacrifices ended to ASSERT that the sacrifices ended. You can't use the claim as proof. (Also re: olam- humans are physical and don't last forever. The Torah does not have this problem.)
2. Exactly! The dual standard had the potential to be a lethal problem for early Christianity. Paul had to know that gentiles would never convert to Christianity if they had to follow the Jewish Torah and be circumcised. Hence the manufactured claim that Jesus ended the sacrifices and obedience to the Law was not required. I believe that the Jerusalem church was following the Torah- why else would they make Gentiles follow 4 of the Laws if the Jews themselves didn't have to follow the Law themselves. That makes zero sense.
3. Yes, there was confusion and still is today. That's why the Jewish people as a whole thoroughly reject Jesus. It flies in the face of the of the clear claim that the Law is forever, for all generations, always a Levitical priest to make sacrifices forever. Also, it goes against the messianic age prophecies that the sin sacrifices will resume in the future.
I don't agree, the LAW... TORAH was not done away with, it was RENEWED... it is the ketubah or the wedding contract with HIS bride. Throughout the word is HIS desire for a people spoken through wedding parables. He still requires HIS bride to follow HIS commandments. "If you love me, you will follow ALL of my commands. There at the time was and still, is the Talmudic law written and taught be the pharisees and contains some pretty disturbing laws.
Hi, Tim! I teach and believe that obedience to God is of utmost importance for believers. We are to submit to His authority over our lives. Jesus said, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14:15).
I’m sure you would agree that not every command God has given applies to every person at all times. Some only apply to certain people (i.e., men, women, parents, Levitical priests) or at certain times (i.e., building an ark, gathering manna, while in exile). And I’m sure you would also agree that we are each only expected to keep the commands of God that apply to us.
The NT expressly teaches that many of the commands given under the Old Covenant Law do not apply to Christians today. (ex. Repeated blood sacrifices for sin are no longer required (Heb 10:18).) We still serve God and obey His commands, “But now we are released from the law, having died with Christ to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code” (Rom 7:6). And “If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law: (Gal. 5:18).
Blessings,
Rob
The “CEREMONIAL LAWS” were done away!
👉(Ephesians 2:15)
👉(Colossians 2:14)
ALL MORAL LAWS are still binding!