• What JGIG Is:

    Joyfully Growing In Grace engages in an examination of beliefs found in the Hebrew Roots Movement, Messianic Judaism, and Netzarim streams of thought and related sects.

    The term “Messianic” is generally understood to describe Jews who have come to believe in Yeshua/Jesus as their Messiah. Jews who are believers in Jesus/Yeshua typically call themselves Jewish/Hebrew Christians or simply, Christians.

    Many Christians meet folks who say they are ‘Messianic’ and assume that those folks are Jewish Christians. Most aren’t Jewish at all, but are Gentile Christians who have chosen to pursue Torah observance and have adopted the Messianic term, calling themselves Messianic Christians, adherents to Messianic Judaism, or simply, Messianics. Some will even try to avoid that label and say that they are followers of "The Way".

    These Gentiles (and to be fair, some Messianic Jews) preach Torah observance/pursuance for Christians, persuading many believers that the Christianity of the Bible is a false religion and that we must return to the faith of the first century sect of Judaism that they say Yeshua (Jesus Christ) embraced. According to them, once you become aware that you should be 'keeping' the edicts and regulations of Mosaic Covenant Law, if you do not, you are then in willful disobedience to God.

    It has been my observation that Christians who adopt the label of Messianic identify more with the tenets of Judaism than they do with the tenets of Christianity. Many reject the label of Christian altogether and some eventually even convert to Judaism.

    1 Thessalonians 5:21-22 says, "But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil."

    Joyfully Growing in Grace examines the methods, claims, and fruits of the Hebrew Roots Movement, Messianic Judaism, and Netzarim streams of thought and related, law-keeping sects.

    To borrow from a Forest Gump quote, “Law ‘keepers’ are like a box of chocolates - ya never know what you’re gonna get!” The goal of JGIG is to be a resource to help those affected by the Torah pursuant movements to try and sort out what they’re dealing with. Make use of the tabs with drop-down menus found at the top of this site – there’s tons of info there, and it’s very navigable.

    Be sure to click on the many embedded links within the posts here - there's lots of additional and related information for you to access that way, as well.

    Welcome, and may God grant you wisdom and discernment as you consider all of these things.

  • Today’s Top Ten

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

  • JGIG on Facebook:

  • Sponsor a child online through Compassion's Christian child sponsorship ministry. Search for a child by age, gender, country, birthday, special needs and more.
  • Recommended Reading

  • Broken Links – UGH

    Do you find it frustrating when you're directed to a link that does not exist? Me too! My apologies for any broken links you may find here.

    JGIG occasionally links to to sites that sometimes move or remove content, forums that periodically cull threads, sites/posters that appear to 'scrub' content from their sites (or YouTube posts, pdf files, etc.) when that content receives negative attention, and others that over time simply cease to exist.

    Please let me know via the 'Contact JGIG' drop-down menu item under the 'About' tab at the top of this page if you come across a link that is broken so that I can try to repair or remove it. Please include the name of the post/article where you found the broken link as well as the link itself. You may be able to find content specified by doing a search and viewing a relocated or cached page/post/video.

    Thanks,
    - JGIG

  • Total Hits

    • 316,179

Hebrew Roots Movement – New Covenant or “Renewed” Covenant?

Folks in the Hebrew Roots Movement will tell us that God, in Christ, instituted a renewal of the Old Covenant instead of giving us a completely New Covenant.  They cite the Hebrew language to support their position, using something known as the ‘Root Word Fallacy’.

Following are two entries from the “Glossary M-Z” page, examining the concept of a New vs. a Renewed Covenant, followed by excellent word studies from two readers,  SheepWrecked (who also has a testimony here at JGIG), and Kimberly from Maine, who have both done a great job examining the language issues surrounding whether or not the Covenant in Christ is New or Renewed.  

Sheep’s and Kimberly’s examinations of the New/Renewed issue are thorough, using step by step progressions.  Each one comes to their conclusion using two different methods of study.  This page will also be linked to on the Articles” page located in the Articles tab located at the top of this site. 

I know that language studies can be tedious (like just shoot me now tedious, though some really like language study), but I think if you stick with the following, you’ll see how clearly God has communicated the New Covenant to us. 

Special thanks to SheepWrecked at For The Love of Truth  and Kimberly from Maine for the language analysis portions of the following:

New Covenant or “Renewed” Covenant?

New Covenant - This, from a post here at JGIG, “Law Keepers – Part 4 – Thoughts on the New Covenant” :

At the Last Supper Jesus held up the bread and the wine and said,

“This is my Body and my blood, do this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:14-20) 

Jesus says in Luke 22:20,

“This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.” 

communion26Jesus wants us to remember that His Flesh and Blood took the place of the old covenant (Law) to make us acceptable (free from sin – from spiritual death to spiritual life) before God. 

It seems to be a rather significant point made during the observance of a feast itself.  He shifted the focus in a very clear way from remembering what the Passover was all about to remembering what the breaking of  HIS Body and the shedding of  HIS Blood was all about . . . replacing the blood on the doorposts (a TEMPORARY solution) with His own Blood (the PERMANENT solution).

To say that that is not enough, or to say that one does not realize the full meaning of all God has done UNLESS one observes the Torah, or that one is not pleasing to or loving God enough if one is not observing the Torah is to say that the shed Blood of Christ is really not enough.  That is ground I would not care to tread upon.  And make no mistake, that is where you are treading if you feel we all should be Torah observant. 

It is not Jesus plus anything that pleases God.  God in the flesh - Jesus – fully God and fully man, was crucified and shed His blood for our sins, rose from the dead three days later, and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father.  He finished the complete work of salvation.  God does not require that we follow Torah.  He nailed the written code to the cross. (Colossians 2:13-15)  He released us from the Law when He released us from our sin through the Blood of Christ. (Romans 7:4-6)

“Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.  For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering.  And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.”  (Romans 8:1-4)

The indwelling of the Holy Spirit in a repentant believer, cleansed by the blood of  THE Lamb, results in the changing of a person – from the inside out!  The Law works itself from the outside in.  And it’s never enough.  Jesus talks a LOT about that in Matthew 23.

Can one truly be “Torah observant” when, in reality, one is selective in which parts of the Law one obeys?  Are there not parts of the Law that require a High Priest and a Temple?  What about animal sacrifice?  Did God become flesh and spill His blood simply to spare us the inconvenience of sacrificing animals?

What about penalties for those who violate the parts of the law for which the punishment is death?  Who will take on the “responsibility” of making sure that appropriate punishment is administered according to the Law?  Do not Deuteronomy 27:26 and Galatians 3:10 say that “cursed is everyone who does not continue to do EVERYTHING written in the Book of the Law?” (Caps mine.)

How is it, in the view of Law keepers, that Grace exempts one from observing/performing the parts of the Law that one finds inconvenient or impractical, but does not exempt one from observing/performing the more palatable parts of the Law?

Honestly, my intent is not to be antagonistic here.  I really wonder how those who are “Torah observant” can reconcile these obvious problems with consistency in obedience to the Law.  If you do go ahead and decide to perform sacrifices, to be consistent, then of what use is the Cross?  Have you not left the Cross, rejected the redemptive work of the Blood that was shed there for you by the Lamb of God?

“When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcisionof your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ.  He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; He took it away, nailing it to the cross.  And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.  Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.  These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ.”  (Colossians 2:13-17)

I wonder . . . . . how does God view Law-keeping through the lenses of His Grace and His Blood?

Beyond the realities of what the New Covenant means to the individual believer, how the believer carries out the commands of Christ - the “Law of Christ” impacts those around that believer in a complete systemic all-inclusive way.  Christ’s commands?  Love God, love others. 

How do the realities of the New Covenant enable us to do that?

Under the New Covenant, the Law of Christ, the believer is now free to love their neighbor without restriction.  We are able to bend down into the dirt of life and minister to those in need and love them with the love that comes from the very Holy Spirit of God.  We don’t need to worry if something or someone will make us “unclean” as we love and minister to those arouned us.

Why?  Because we are cleansed with the Blood of Christ, not merely covered by the blood of animals.  Our state of redemption and “clean-ness” is permanent and irrevocable – incorruptible - based on the Righteousness of Christ, which, as He lives His Life in and through us, produces the Fruit of the Spirit, Love, which fulfills the commandment to love one another, which in turn fulfills the Law.  In Christ, we are able to Love God, Love others, whatever the circumstance.

That is the beauty, the reality, of the New Covenant! 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Renewed” CovenantOne false definition of the New Covenant re-termed the “Renewed Covenant” typical in the Hebrew Roots Movement is found at 1bread.org:

“At His last Passover, Yahshua initiated a “New Covenant” (prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31). In Hebrew, it is really a lawrenewal of the same covenant, with a few allowances added for while we make the transition back.  [???]  But the Covenant is “with the House of Israel and the House of Judah”. It cannot be fully in effect until Israel is back together, for it is not with individuals but with a unified nation. So our focus needs to shift from just being saved individuals to again being the people of Israel. Don’t pass up this highest of callings! We dare not fail again.” 

“We dare not fail again”???  Who’s running the show in the Hebrew Roots Movement?  Man or God?

No Scriptures come to mind to support the above rendering of a “renewed Covenant”.  In more mainstream Hebrew Roots circles the concept of a “renewed Covenant” vs. the “New Covenant” is rendered with the mis-use of the original languages of Scripture. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here’s a language analysis from SheepWrecked at “For the Love of Truth”, which examines whether God has given us a New or a Renewed Covenant in Christ.  Used with permission, and be sure to check out Kimberly from Maine’s take with a different style and emphasis after SheepWrecked’s article – both are well worth the time.

 Is it the New or Renewed Covenant?

By SheepWrecked

Some Hebrew roots “scholars” are teaching that we are under a renewed covenant, not new, therefore we must follow the Old Covenant laws as well. Some have gone so far as to teach that the New Covenant will not be in effect until the return of Jesus.

B’riyt Chadashah is the phrase that appears in Jeremiah 31:

Behold, the days come, says the LORD, that I will cut a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I cut with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt (which covenant of Mine they broke, although I was a husband to them, says the LORD). (Jeremiah 31:31-32)

B’riyt means covenant, which is the equivalent for the word testament. Chadash in the context of Jeremiah 31:31 does not mean renewed but new, and in this passage the adjectival form for renewedwould have to appear as mechudeshet to make it mean renewed, and not chadashah as found in the Hebrew text. We can determine that the meaning is something completely new because following verse 31, the negative “lo” appears in the Hebrew text (lo kabriyt). Contextually, this makes it clear that the writer is differentiating between an existing and a “new” covenant. The new covenant referred to in verse 31 is referred to in the Hebrew of verse 32 as lo meaning “not” the previous covenant and is defined in the passage below as not being:

“. . . the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; my covenant which they broke . . . “

There are two separate and distinct forms of chadash listed in the Hebrew lexicon for new (H2319) and renewed (H2318). Another Biblical Hebrew form for renewed is mechudash, the pu`al particple from the root (shoresh) chet-dalet-shin. Chidesh is a modern Hebrew word that is also used for renewed.

H2319
חדשׁ
châdâsh
BDB Definition:
1) new, new thing, fresh
Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H2318
Same Word by TWOT Number: 613a

Here is the Hebrew lexicon listing of the word that is translated as renewed:

H2318
חדש
châdash
BDB Definition:
1) to be new, renew, repair
1a) (Piel)
1a1) to renew, make anew
1a2) to repair
1b) (Hithpael) to renew oneself
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root
Same Word by TWOT Number: 613

New

Let’s take a look at how the Jewish scholars that made up the translation team for the 1917 Jewish Publication Society TeNaKh translated chadash (H2319) contextually:

30 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant (b’riyt chadashah) with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah;

Here is the Hebrew:

הִנֵּה יָמִים בָּאִים, נְאֻם-יְהוָה; וְכָרַתִּי, אֶת-בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶת-בֵּית יְהוּדָה–בְּרִית חֲדָשָׁה.

Just to be sure, I referenced the latest version of the JPS TeNaKh (1985). It says new there as well. As a matter of fact, it says new in every translation I reviewed, with the exception of a few Hebrew Roots translations which are filled with faulty language scholarship, and are purely agenda driven.

So using the Hebrew roots teacher’s logic, shouldn’t this passage below also be renewed then?

Do not remember former things, nor consider the things of old. Behold, I will do a new 2319 (chadashah) thing; now it shall sprout. Shall you not know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, rivers in the desert.(Isaiah 43:18-19)

Using the same reasoning, wouldn’t it be a renewed song in the following passages as well?

Sing to Him a new (H2319) song; play skillfully, with shouts of joy. (Psalms 33:3)

And He put a new (H2319) song of praise to our God in my mouth; many shall see and shall fear and shall trust in the LORD. (Psalms 40:3)

O sing to the LORD a new (H2319) song; sing to the LORD, all the earth. (Psalms 96:1)

O sing to the LORD a new (H2319) song, for He has done wondrous things; His right hand and His holy arm has saved Him. (Psalms 98:1)

I will sing a new (H2319) song to You, O God; I will sing praises to You on a harp of ten strings (Psalms 144:9)

Praise the LORD! Sing to the LORD a new (H2319) song, His praise in the assembly of the saints. (Psalms 149:1)

Sing a new (H2319) song to the LORD; His praise from the end of the earth, you who go to sea, and all that is in it; the coasts and their people. (Isaiah 42:10)

How did Hebrew Scribes translate the word “new” when they put together the Greek traslation (the Septuagint) of the Old Testament?
Below are some of the words that the Hebrew scribes used when translating the Hebrew word chadashinto a Greek equivalent for the Septuagint (LXX) and their definitions:

H2319
chadash G2537 kainos
chadash G3501 neos
G2537
καινοìς
kainos
Thayer Definition:
1) new
1a) as respects form
1a1) recently made, fresh, recent, unused, unworn
1b) as respects substance
1b1) of a new kind, unprecedented, novel, uncommon, unheard of
Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: of uncertain affinity
Citing in TDNT: 3:447, 388

Now from the New Testament writings we have these passages using the Greek equivalent for chadash listed above, which is kainos (G2537):

Rev 5:9 And2532 they sung103 [5719] a new 2537 song 5603, saying3004 [5723], Thou art1488 [5748] worthy514 to take2983 [5629] the book975, and2532 to open455 [5658] the seals4973 thereof846: for3754 thou wast slain4969 [5648], and2532 hast redeemed59 [5656] us2248 to God2316 by1722 thy4675 blood129 out of1537 every3956 kindred5443, and2532 tongue1100, and2532 people2992, and2532 nation1484;

Rev 14:3 And2532 they sung103 [5719] as it were5613 a new 2537 song 5603 before1799 the throne2362, and2532 before1799 the four5064 beasts2226, and2532 the elders4245: and2532 no man3762 could1410 [5711] learn3129 [5629] that new 5603 but1508 the hundred1540 and forty5062 and four5064 thousand5505, which3588 were redeemed59 [5772] from575 the earth1093.

Mat 26:28 For1063 this5124 is2076 [5748] my3450 blood129 of the new 2537 testament1242, which3588 is shed1632 [5746] for4012 many4183 for1519 the remission859 of sins266.

Heb 8:8 For1063 finding fault3201 [5740] with them846, he saith3004 [5719], Behold2400 [5628], the days2250 come2064 [5736], saith3004 [5719] the Lord2962, when2532 I will make4931 [5692] a new2537 covenant1242 with1909 the house3624 of Israel2474 and2532 with1909 the house3624 of Judah2455

Heb 8:13 In1722 that he saith3004 [5721], A new2537 covenant , he hath made3822 the first4413 old3822 [5758]. Now1161 that which decayeth3822 [5746] and2532 waxeth old1095 [5723] is ready1451 to vanish away854.

And the now another equivalent word for chadash(neos G3501) is used (see definition below):

Heb 12:24 And2532 to Jesus2424 the mediator3316 of the new 3501 covenant1242, and2532 to the blood129 of sprinkling4473, that speaketh2980 [5723] better things2909 than3844 that of Abel6.

G3501
νεìος / νεωìτερος
neos / neōteros
Thayer Definition:
1) recently born, young, youthful
2) new
Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: a primary word
Citing in TDNT: 4:896, 628

Someone in the Hebrew Roots Movement may give this example while trying to convince you of the “renewed” concept:
“So what happens to the ‘Chodesh’ moon? Does it just go poof when its cycle is done?  [Editor's note: A Hebrew Roots adherent recently put it this way to me: "Keep in mind Jer. 31:31 talks of the new covenant as the 'old' one being written on our hearts. Also keep in mind that the Hebraic understanding of "new" is more like, 'renewed'. Just as the New moon is seen every month and is certainly not a different, one, so too the Covenant is not a different one, but a renewed one."]

Actually, chodesh is listed as a totally different word in the Hebrew lexicon, that has its derivation from a word that is listed as meaning renewed.

H2320
חדש
chôdesh
BDB Definition:
1) the new moon, month, monthly
1a) the first day of the month
1b) the lunar month
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from *H2318*
Same Word by TWOT Number: 613b

The Bad News and the Good News
I once read that a Jewish person living in Israel on a good day could only fulfill about 240 of the 613 commandments established by the rabbis. That is because there is no Temple, no Priesthood, and other various reasons. If you do the math on that, it means that a person living in the US could probably only fulfill 40 +/-  percent of the Law on a good day.

Here is the bad news:

If you truly fulfill the royal Law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well. But if you have partiality you work sin, being reproved by the Law as transgressors. For whoever shall keep all the Law, but stumbles in one, he has become guilty of all. (James 2:8-10)

To believe that you are keeping the Law (which one is not capable of) and then switching to grace when someone points that out, is a terrible witness for the price that Christ paid (in my personal opinion). This is where the whole Hebrew roots concept of a “renewed covenant” got its start. What do the scriptures say, and what is truly your final authority? Let’s look to the book of Hebrews just to be sure:

Truly, then, if perfection was through the Levitical priestly office (for the people had been given Law under it), why yet was there need for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek and not to be called according to the order of Aaron? For the priestly office having been changed, of necessity a change of law also occurs.

For, indeed, an annulment of thepreceding command comes about because of its weakness and unprofitableness. For the Law perfected nothing, but a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. And by how much it was not without oath-taking; for they truly becoming priests are without oath-taking, but He with oath-taking, through the One saying to Him, The Lord swore, and will not care to change, “You are a priest to the age according to the order of Melchizedek;” by so much Jesus has become Surety of a better covenant. (Hebrews 7:11-12,18-22)

For anyone to teach that the New Covenant is not here yet goes against scripture, and is agenda driven. Those who teach this are alluding to the fact that we are still under the Old Covenant until Christ returns. Since the book of Hebrews shows that to be incorrect, many of the Hebrew roots teachers are now saying that the book of Hebrews is not authentic, and should be removed from the canon.

And now for the Good News (The Gospel!)
According to the Book that I read, the Law is now written in our hearts.

But now He has gotten a more excellent ministry, also by so much as He is a Mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises:

For if that first was faultless, place would not have been sought for a second. For finding fault, He said to them, “Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, and I will make an end on the house of Israel and on the house of Judah; a new covenant shall be, not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day of My taking hold of their hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I did not regard them”, says the Lord. “Because this is the covenant which I will covenant with the house of Israel after those days”, says the Lord, “giving My Laws into their mind, and I will write them on their hearts,and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. And they shall no more teach each one their neighbor, and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord’; because all shall know Me, from the least of them to their great ones. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousnesses, and I will not at all remember their sins and their lawless deeds.” In the saying, New, He has made the first old. And the thing being made old and growing aged is near disappearing. (Hebrews 8:6-13)

A covenant cannot be changed after the death of the testator:

And for this cause He is the Mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were covered under the first testament, those who are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead, otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator is living. And so not even the first testament was dedicated without blood. (Hebrews 9:15-18)

Brothers, I speak according to man, a covenant having been ratified, even among mankind, no one sets aside or adds to it. (Galatians 3:15)

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kimberly from Maine Says:

After reading several statements claiming that because the New Moon is not actually new therefore the New Covenant is not either, but “REnewed”, I decided to do a word study on “new” and “renew.” I found the study quite enlightening and thought I’d share my results with you.

According to Strong’s Concordance, there are seven different Hebrew words translated “new.”

The first is 1069 bakar baw-kar’ a primitive root; properly, to burst the womb, i.e. (causatively) bear or make early fruit (of woman or tree); also (as denominative from 1061) to give the birthright:–make firstborn, be firstling, bring forth first child (new fruit). It is translated “new” in the following verse:

“And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth NEW fruit according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine.” Eze 47:12

The second instance is 1278 briy’ah ber-ee-aw’ feminine from 1254; a creation, i.e. a novelty:–new thing. It is found in this verse:

“But if the LORD make a NEW thing, and the earth open her mouth, and swallow them up, with all that appertain unto them, and they go down quick into the pit; then ye shall understand that these men have provoked the LORD.” Nu 16:30

The third instance is 2323 chadath khad-ath’ (Aramaic) corresponding to 2319; new:–new and is found in this verse:

“4With three rows of great stones, and a row of new timber: and let the expenses be given out of the king’s house: 5And also let the golden and silver vessels of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took forth out of the temple which is at Jerusalem, and brought unto Babylon, be restored, and brought again unto the temple which is at Jerusalem, every one to his place, and place them in the house of God.” Ezr 6:4-5

The fourth instance is 2961 tariy taw-ree’ from an unused root apparently meaning to be moist; properly, dripping; hence, fresh (i.e. recently made such):–new, putrefying. This word is used in the verse

“15And he found a NEW jawbone of an ass, and put forth his hand, and took it, and slew a thousand men therewith.”Judges 15:15

In each of these instances, the words I have given were used just a single time, in the verses given.

Then I made an interesting discovery. The next word is 8492 tiyrowsh tee-roshe’ or tiyrosh {tee-roshe’}; from 3423 in the sense of expulsion; must or fresh grape-juice (as just squeezed out); by implication (rarely) fermented wine:–(new, sweet) wine. This word is translated “new wine” in 13 verses. In other words, if you look up “new” in the verse Proverbs 3:10 and then “wine” in that same verse, you are given the number 8492 for the word “new” and again for the word “wine.” In other words, “new” is not one Hebrew word and then “wine” another. “Tiyrowsh” means “new wine.” Here are some verses so that you may look for yourself:

“39For the children of Israel and the children of Levi shall bring the offering of the corn, of the NEW WINE, and the oil, unto the chambers, where are the vessels of the sanctuary, and the priests that minister, and the porters, and the singers: and we will not forsake the house of our God.” Ne 10:39

“10So shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out with NEW WINE.” Pr 3:10

“11Whoredom and wine and NEW WINE take away the heart.” Ho 4:11

With this discovery fresh in mind, I approached the next word 2320 chodesh kho’-desh from 2318; the new moon; by implication, a month:–month(-ly), new moon. Again, I found that there is not one Hebrew word for “new” and another for “moon,” but a single Hebrew word translated “new moon” in 24 verses. I have given four verses as examples so that you may look for yourself.

“5And David said unto Jonathan, Behold, to morrow is the NEW MOON, and I should not fail to sit with the king at meat: but let me go, that I may hide myself in the field unto the third day at even.” 1 Sam 20:5

“23And he said, Wherefore wilt thou go to him to day? it is neither NEW MOON, nor sabbath. And she said, It shall be well.” 2 Ki 4:23

“3Blow up the trumpet in the NEW MOON, in the time appointed, on our solemn feast day.” Ps 81:3

“23And it shall come to pass, that from one NEW MOON to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.” Isa 66:23

But there’s more! While the word chodesh is translated “new moon” in 24 instances, in another 217 it is simply translated “month.”

“4And the ark rested in the seventh MONTH, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.” Gen 8:4

“19And the people came up out of Jordan on the tenth day of the first MONTH, and encamped in Gilgal, in the east border of Jericho.” Jos 4:19

At this point, I find it simply illogical that one can conclude that because “chodesh” means “new moon” and “month” that therefore the “new” of “New covenant” in Jer 31:31 means “renew.” But we will continue the study…

The final word translated “new” in the Old Testament is 2319 chadash khaw-dawsh’ from 2318; new:–fresh, new thing. There are 45 instances of this word, one of them the Jeremiah verse in question:

“31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a NEW covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:” Jer 31:31

It would indeed change our understanding of this important promise if we understand “new” to mean “renew.” But are we being honest with the other uses of this word if we take it to mean renew?

“8Now there arose up a NEW king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.” Ex 1:8

“11And he said unto her, If they bind me fast with NEW ropes that never were occupied, then shall I be weak, and be as another man.” Judg 16:11

“3Sing unto him a NEW song; play skilfully with a loud noise.” Ps 33:3

“19Behold, I will do a NEW thing; now it shall spring forth; shall ye not know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert.” Isa 43:19

Clearly, the word “new” that is used in Jer 31:31 must be understood to mean “fresh, new thing” if the other instances of that same word are to make any sense at all.

But to be fair, let’s consider the word “renew.”
“Renew” is translated 10 times from just two Hebrew words. Three times it is translated from 2498 chalaph khaw-laf’ a primitive root; properly, to slide by, i.e. (by implication) to hasten away, pass on, spring up, pierce or change:–abolish, alter, change, cut off, go on forward, grow up, be over, pass (away, on, through), renew, sprout, strike through in these verses:

“31But they that wait upon the LORD shall RENEW their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.” Isa 40:31

“1Keep silence before me, O islands; and let the people RENEW their strength: let them come near; then let them speak: let us come near together to judgment.” Isa 41:1

“20My glory was fresh in me, and my bow was RENEWED in my hand.” Job 29:20

The other seven times, “renew” was translated from 2318 chadash khaw-dash’ a primitive root; to be new; causatively, to rebuild:–renew, repair.

“14Then said Samuel to the people, Come, and let us go to Gilgal, and RENEW the kingdom there.” 1 Sam 11:14

“10Create in me a clean heart, O God; and RENEW a right spirit within me.” Ps 51:10

“21Turn thou us unto thee, O LORD, and we shall be turned; RENEW our days as of old.” La 5:21

“8And when Asa heard these words, and the prophecy of Oded the prophet, he took courage, and put away the abominable idols out of all the land of Judah and Benjamin, and out of the cities which he had taken from mount Ephraim, and RENEWED the altar of the LORD, that was before the porch of the LORD.” 2 Ch 15:8

“5Who satisfieth thy mouth with good things; so that thy youth is RENEWED like the eagle’s.” Ps 103:5

“17Thou RENEWEST thy witnesses against me, and increasest thine indignation upon me; changes and war are against me.” Job 10:17

“30Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou RENEWEST the face of the earth” Ps 104:30

Since I have engaged in this study, I stand convinced that the “new” in Jer 31:31 does indeed mean “fresh, new thing” rather than “renew.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Many thanks to SheepWrecked and Kimberly from Maine for their thorough examinations of the ‘New/Renewed’ language issues!

Folks, don’t let those in the Hebrew Roots Movement try to convince you that the Bible’s original language says that we are to go back to the Law.  As you can see from the above, God’s plan of redemption through the life, death, resurrection and ascension of Christ Jesus ushered in not a “renewed” covenant, but the New Covenant – we are no longer under the Law of Moses, but now under the Law of Christ, which is actually about Fruit rather than about Law.

The New Covenant is so vastly superior; a better covenant built upon better promises, with a Perfect Sacrifice and a Perfect, Forever High Priest!  Don’t settle for or strive to live under the Old Covenant, or even try to mix the two. 

Check out these free audio teachings regarding the New Covenant and the New Life we have in Christ (Highly Recommended):

Three other good audio teachings which round out much of the contextual, Scriptural basis for the Truths of the New Covenant can be heard here:

The first two teachings are from an Evangelical stream of faith, while the next three are from more of a Charismatic stream of faith, but all are very sound theologically.

Another good resource for New Covenant articles in print form can be found at Escape to Reality.  Highly Recommended.

These teachings and more New Covenant teachings can be found on the Media Page here at JGIG.  Lots of good resources there – check it out!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other articles of interest:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you or someone you know is in the HRM or a related Law-keeping sect and are questioning what you believe, a clear presentation of the Gospel can be found HERE.  For more resources regarding the Hebrew Roots/Messianic movements see the Post Index and the Articles Page.  General study helps, discernment, and apologetics sites can be found HERE.  Good, foundational studies with a special emphasis on Old Covenant/New Covenant Truths can be found HERE.  Be sure to check out the Testimonies Page, as well.   Make use of the tabs with drop-down menus found at the top of this site – there’s tons of info there, and it’s very navigable.  May God guide and bless you as you seek His Truth.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

About these ads

88 Responses

  1. i got here from the momys list – i’ve been very uncomfortable there with the lawkeeping that seems to be becoming so rampant there – and i appreciate your scholarship and clear thinking –
    One question – in zechariah the other night i read a verse that talks about God judging Egypt and the heathen for not keeping his feasts – what do you think is the significance of this? Would the feasts be something separate from the law? something that is a gift given? but why would egypt be held liable for not keeping it?
    It seems to me you may have the answer for me:) – thank you!
    stephanie (www.homeschoolblogger.com/mamazee) -

  2. hi wendy. have just spent a few hours reading through all your posts and comments. well done! i am familiar with the discussion that sparked your research (!), and found i had even saved some of your posts last year because I was impressed with how clearly you articulated the scriptural refutations of the torah revivalists (or whatever we call them! actually, i notice a recent comment on the email list (ykwim!) that holds to these theories yet demands not to labelled… strange…).
    anyway, you have done a terrific job, and i have it helpful in recent discussions with a friend recently departed from the sda church. some similar issues to grapple with for her :)
    bye for now…
    mrs b

  3. Hi Stephanie -

    One of the main teachings in the Hebrew Roots Movement is that sacrifices and Temple ordinances will be reinstituted in the Millenium. Zechariah 14 is one Scripture that the HRM uses to support that teaching.

    Here’s the passage:

    Zechariah 14

    1 A day of the LORD is coming when your plunder will be divided among you.

    2 I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped. Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city.

    3 Then the LORD will go out and fight against those nations, as he fights in the day of battle. 4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south. 5 You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the LORD my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

    6 On that day there will be no light, no cold or frost. 7 It will be a unique day, without daytime or nighttime—a day known to the LORD. When evening comes, there will be light.

    8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half to the eastern sea and half to the western sea, in summer and in winter.

    9 The LORD will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one LORD, and his name the only name.

    10 The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah. But Jerusalem will be raised up and remain in its place, from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses. 11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure.

    12 This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths. 13 On that day men will be stricken by the LORD with great panic. Each man will seize the hand of another, and they will attack each other. 14 Judah too will fight at Jerusalem. The wealth of all the surrounding nations will be collected—great quantities of gold and silver and clothing. 15 A similar plague will strike the horses and mules, the camels and donkeys, and all the animals in those camps.

    16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles. 17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, they will have no rain. 18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The LORD will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles. 19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

    20 On that dayHOLY TO THE LORD will be inscribed on the bells of the horses, and the cooking pots in the LORD’s house will be like the sacred bowls in front of the altar. 21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the LORD Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite in the house of the LORD Almighty.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    A couple of things strike me about this passage. First of all, the prophecy was communicated in terms that both the prophet and the hearers were familiar with. Though they had prophecy regarding their coming Messiah, they had no working knowledge of Who He is or how His ministry and and the plan of Redemption would actually manifest. Their concepts of what was to come were in the shadows of the Feasts . . . the reality was still to come in Jesus Christ.

    Secondly, this is a passage which those in the HRM like to use to convince people that the temple and sacrificial systems will be re-instituted during the Millenium. So we “better start practicing now”. Those in the HRM who are Amillenialists hold more to a Dominionism theology, teaching that we (believers) are responsible for bringing about the world conditions to make it “possible” for Messiah to come back.

    Knowing how much I don’t know about the HRM (there are so many variables in the HRM spectrum with so many cultish belief systems that feed into it – it’s hard to keep up!), I’m sure there are several more views that I’m not mentioning. But the basic idea is that the Old Covenant practices will be put back into practice, with Messiah as the Ruler over all.

    Back to the prophecy of this passage being communicated in terms that the prophet and the hearers were familiar with . . . If you read it in that context, and then re-read it with the truths of the completed work of Redemption in the New Covenant in mind, you can see where the shadows of what was to come apply to what is now the reality in Christ.

    Christ came to “Tabernacle” with us in that He came and dwelt among men fully as God and man, and after His Ascension, He sent His Holy Spirit to indwell believers, which makes us the tabernacle (“do you not know that your body is a temple . . . “).

    Why does the passage talk about Egypt? Egypt, Babylon, and Rome have all been symbolic of the world (the unsaved) in the Bible. If you read the passage in the context of believers worshipping and non-believers obviously not worshipping, it fits in a New Covenant perspective. Eternal life for the redeemed, death (no rain = no life) for the un-redeemed.

    The HRM view that Old Covenant Feasts and practices will come back makes no sense at all considering that Christ has fulfilled all. He was the FINAL sacrifice. He is the reality of what the Feasts forshadowed. There are some events that still need to play out, historically, but the work is done. It is finished.

    Christ commanded us to love God, love others, make disciples. Going back to the Law doesn’t spread the Gospel to the nations, it isolates and turns ones heart toward self and the duties we must perform to be pleasing to God. What He really desires is for us to merely share the Life for which He paid so dear a price with others, bringing precious souls into relationship with Him.

    Hope that helps =o),
    Wendy

  4. Hi mrs b –

    Thanks for your kind words about the blog. There are many similarities in SDA and HRM teachings . . . many SDA concepts have been adopted by HRMers. Indeed many former SDA folks are now HRMers! I’ll email you with a link to an SDA family’s blog who is writing their testimony about their time in the SDA church, then the HRM, then into FREEDOM! I’ll be posting portions of the testiomony and linking to it here at JGIG when it’s complete, but I’ll give you the link so you can take a “sneak peak”. Feel free to give the link to your friend – she may find the content there encouraging as she comes out of the SDA.

    Blessings and thanks again,
    Wendy

  5. thanks wendy :)
    one of the issues my sda friend struggles with is the issue of prophesies. end times and all that. my first response is that satan can use those issues to distract us from Jesus. the more we might worry about the end times prophesies, the less we dwell on Jesus… that was a revelation to her :) i will enjoy reading some more stuff on that sda thing. we had some invlovement in an sda school a few years ago. it was tiny and the folks there were beautiful christian people without the hang-ups of the traditional sda church. still, there is always so much more to learn!
    blessings,
    mrs b

  6. Great discussion on new/renewed – to me one of the most damaging heresies of the HRM. On Zechariah – some in dispensational circles do believe that some form of feast keeping will be taking place under the reign of Christ here on earth. I think the church I go to now believes this – although I’m not clear on all the details yet. Our pastor just started preaching through Ezekiel so I will learn a great deal about their position on prophecy. That being said, using Zech. 14 to prove we should observe feasts now is not good Bible interpretation – taking a rather cryptic prophetic passage over clear direct teaching passages in the New Testament epistles. Very bad hermeneutics. But this was one of the sticking verses for us that we held on to right up to the bitter end. When something supports what you WANT to believe, it’s hard to see your error.
    8thday

  7. ________________________________________________________________________
    JGIG wrote:

    There are two separate and distinct forms of chadash listed in the Hebrew lexicon for new (H2319) and renewed (H2318). Another Biblical Hebrew form for renewed is mechudash, the pu`al particple from the root (shoresh) chet-dalet-shin. Chidesh is a modern Hebrew word that is also used for renewed.

    H2319
    חדשׁ
    châdâsh
    BDB Definition:
    1) new, new thing, fresh
    Part of Speech: adjective
    A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from H2318
    Same Word by TWOT Number: 613a

    Here is the Hebrew lexicon listing of the word that is translated as renewed:

    H2318
    חדש
    châdash
    BDB Definition:
    1) to be new, renew, repair
    1a) (Piel)
    1a1) to renew, make anew
    1a2) to repair
    1b) (Hithpael) to renew oneself
    Part of Speech: verb
    A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root
    Same Word by TWOT Number: 613

    Actually, chodesh is listed as a totally different word in the Hebrew lexicon, that has its derivation from a word that is listed as meaning renewed.

    H2320
    חדש
    chôdesh
    BDB Definition:
    1) the new moon, month, monthly
    1a) the first day of the month
    1b) the lunar month
    Part of Speech: noun masculine
    A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from *H2318*
    Same Word by TWOT Number: 613b
    ______________________________________________________________________

    Really? chodesh is completely different from chadash???? Chodesh H2320 has the SAME word derivation as chadash (H2319), they both come from ***H2318***

    H2318 is the root word of both chadash as well as chodesh, you even printed it above yourself. Also if you look closely at the Hebrew letters read from right to left they are (chet, dalet, shin), you will find even in your printing they are the same except H2319 has a vowel point with it….so the words are not so different as you would like your readers to think, and when they are not separated by a lot of text, it is quite apparent.

    • If JGIG misused the term “totally different” or “completely different,” that doesn’t detract from her point. Both words cover different aspects of newness, to be sure, BUT the point was they ARE different, which the HRM won’t admit, even if a Strong’s Concordance should be dropped on their head

      • ” . . . which the HRM won’t admit, even if a Strong’s Concordance should be dropped on their head.”

        *chuckle* =oD

  8. Momma 2 4 -

    One letter can make a difference in the meaning of a word.

    Take the English words ‘had’ and ‘has’ for instance. They both have their root in the word ‘have’, but mean totally different things. Tense makes all the difference in that case.

    As for contextual influence, consider the word ‘wind’. In the sentence, “The wind was blowing very hard” the word means a strong breeze. In the sentence, “I need to wind this clock” the word means something completely different – an action that one takes to enable the action of a clock to run. I like that example because in one instance (the wind that blows), we have no control over it. In the other instance (to wind a clock), we have total control. Two words that “look” the same could not be more different in reality.

    The language portion of the post you refer to was done by someone else, so I can’t comment on the particulars you address. I’ll contact that person to see if they would like to respond to your specific comment. [I have contacted them and they will respond.]

    It seems to me however that if the English language has instances of similar or identical words having different meanings based on tense or context like the examples I give above, it stands to reason that Hebrew, as well as other languages, would have similar peculiarities. And it is my understanding that Hebrew is a relatively “primitive” language, thereby making context, tense, and other things unique to Hebrew all the more important when determining the meaning of what’s written.

    Keep in mind that the HRM is expert at NOT adhering to basic language rules to come to the doctrinal conclusions that they do.

    Blessings,
    JGIG

  9. Some clarification on the “new” vs. “renewed” Hebrew:

    Chadash in the context of Jeremiah 31:31 does not mean renewed but new, and in this passage the adjectival form for renewed would have to appear as mechudeshet to make it mean renewed, and not chadashah as found in the Hebrew text.

    We can determine that the meaning is something completely new because following verse 31, the negative “lo” appears in the Hebrew text (lo kabriyt) Contextually [which is how Hebrew is translated], this makes it clear that the writer is differentiating between an existing and a “new” covenant. The new covenant referred to in verse 31 is referred to in the Hebrew of verse 32 as lo meaning “not” the previous covenant and is defined in the passage below as not being:

    “the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; my covenant which they broke”

    Let’s take a look at how the Jewish scholars that made up the translation team for the 1917 Jewish Publication Society TeNaKh translated chadash (H2319) contextually:

    30 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant (b’riyt chadashah) with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah;

    Here is the Hebrew:

    הִנֵּה יָמִים בָּאִים, נְאֻם-יְהוָה; וְכָרַתִּי, אֶת-בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶת-בֵּית יְהוּדָה–
    בְּרִית חֲדָשָׁה.

    Just to be sure, in checking the latest version of the JPS TeNaKh (1985) – it says new there as well. As a matter of fact, it says new in every translation that was reviewed, with the exception of a few Hebrew Roots translations which have some major issues with faulty language scholarship, and appear to be purely agenda driven.

    So using the Hebrew Roots teacher’s logic, shouldn’t this passage below also be renewed then?

    Isaiah 43
    18 Do not remember former things, nor consider the things of old.
    19 Behold, I will do a new 2319 (chadashah) thing; now it shall sprout. Shall you not know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, rivers in the desert.

    Using the same reasoning, wouldn’t it be a renewed song in the following passages as well?

    Psalms 33
    3 Sing to Him a new (H2319) song; play skillfully, with shouts of joy.

    Psalms 40
    3 And He put a new (H2319) song of praise to our God in my mouth; many shall see and shall fear and shall trust in the LORD.

    Psalms 96
    1 O sing to the LORD a new (H2319) song; sing to the LORD, all the earth.

    Psalms 98
    1 O sing to the LORD a new (H2319) song, for He has done wondrous things; His right hand and His holy arm has saved Him.

    Psalms 144
    9 I will sing a new (H2319) song to You, O God; I will sing praises to You on a harp of ten strings

    Psalms 149
    1 Praise the LORD! Sing to the LORD a new (H2319) song, His praise in the assembly of the saints.

    Isaiah 42
    10 Sing a new (H2319) song to the LORD; His praise from the end of the earth, you who go to sea, and all that is in it; the coasts and their people.

    Below are some of the words, that the Hebrew scribes used when translating the Hebrew word chadash into a Greek equivalent for the Septuagint (LXX) and their definitions:

    H2319

    chadash G2537 kainos
    chadash G3501 neos

    G2537
    καινοìς
    kainos
    Thayer Definition:
    1) new
    1a) as respects form
    1a1) recently made, fresh, recent, unused, unworn
    1b) as respects substance
    1b1) of a new kind, unprecedented, novel, uncommon, unheard of
    Part of Speech: adjective
    A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: of uncertain affinity
    Citing in TDNT: 3:447, 388

    Now from the New Testament writings we have these passages using the Greek equivalent for chadash listed above, which is kainos (G2357):

    Rev 5:9 And2532 they sung103 [5719] a new 2537 song 5603, saying3004 [5723], Thou art1488 [5748] worthy514 to take2983 [5629] the book975, and2532 to open455 [5658] the seals4973 thereof846: for3754 thou wast slain4969 [5648], and2532 hast redeemed59 [5656] us2248 to God2316 by1722 thy4675 blood129 out of1537 every3956 kindred5443, and2532 tongue1100, and2532 people2992, and2532 nation1484;

    Rev 14:3 And2532 they sung103 [5719] as it were5613 a new 2537 song 5603 before1799 the throne2362, and2532 before1799 the four5064 beasts2226, and2532 the elders4245: and2532 no man3762 could1410 [5711] learn3129 [5629] that new 5603 but1508 the hundred1540 and forty5062 and four5064 thousand5505, which3588 were redeemed59 [5772] from575 the earth1093.

    Mat 26:28 For1063 this5124 is2076 [5748] my3450 blood129 of the new2537 testament1242, which3588 is shed1632 [5746] for4012 many4183 for1519 the remission859 of sins266.

    Heb 8:8 For1063 finding fault3201 [5740] with them846, he saith3004 [5719], Behold2400 [5628], the days2250 come2064 [5736], saith3004 [5719] the Lord2962, when2532 I will make4931 [5692] a new2537 covenant1242 with1909 the house3624 of Israel2474 and2532 with1909 the house3624 of Judah2455

    Heb 8:13 In1722 that he saith3004 [5721], A new2537 covenant , he hath made3822 the first4413 old3822 [5758]. Now1161 that which decayeth3822 [5746] and2532 waxeth old1095 [5723] is ready1451 to vanish away854.

    And the now another equivalent word for chadash (neos
    G3501) is used (see definition below):

    Heb 12:24 And2532 to Jesus2424 the mediator3316 of the new3501 covenant1242, and2532 to the blood129 of sprinkling4473, that speaketh2980 [5723] better things2909 than3844 that of Abel6.

    G3501
    νεìος / νεωìτερος
    neos / neōteros
    Thayer Definition:
    1) recently born, young, youthful
    2) new
    Part of Speech: adjective
    A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: a primary word
    Citing in TDNT: 4:896, 628

    chodesh is listed as a totally different word in the Hebrew lexicon, that has its derivation from a word that is listed as meaning renewed.

    H2320
    חדשׁ
    chôdesh
    BDB Definition:
    1) the new moon, month, monthly
    1a) the first day of the month
    1b) the lunar month
    Part of Speech: noun masculine
    A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: from *H2318*
    Same Word by TWOT Number: 613b

    By saying that the Masoretic manuscripts are incorrect, which is where all Biblical Hebrew is found, then one is stating that all Hebrew speakers up to and including today [about 5 million in the world presently], which includes secular and religious Hebrew scholars, are ALL terribly wrong! Unbelievable!

    It’s clear that self taught Hebrew Roots “scholars” who go back into a concordance to find root words [under the umbrella of theological agenda] with the desire to redefine/change/twist what was written by God, and then translated by credentialed peer-reviewed scholars; are probably not real Torah observant.

    Just a quick observation/question: In English, new and renewed – do they mean the same thing? If one buys something new, not like they had before – is it renewed? Please check the two words – they both have the same “root” word, “new”, but mean something entirely different. Think about it …

  10. After reading several statements claiming that because the New Moon is not actually new therefore the New Covenant is not either, but “REnewed”,
    I decided to do a word study on “new” and “renew.” I found the study quite
    enlightening and thought I’d share my results with you.

    According to Strong’s Concordance, there are seven different Hebrew words
    translated “new.”

    The first is 1069 bakar baw-kar’ a primitive root; properly, to burst the
    womb, i.e. (causatively) bear or make early fruit (of woman or tree); also
    (as denominative from 1061) to give the birthright:–make firstborn, be
    firstling, bring forth first child (new fruit). It is translated “new” in
    the following verse: “And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side
    and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade,
    neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth NEW fruit
    according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the
    sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for
    medicine.” Eze 47:12

    The second instance is 1278 briy’ah ber-ee-aw’ feminine from 1254; a
    creation, i.e. a novelty:–new thing. It is found in this verse: “But if the
    LORD make a NEW thing, and the earth open her mouth, and swallow them up,
    with all that appertain unto them, and they go down quick into the pit; then
    ye shall understand that these men have provoked the LORD.” Nu 16:30

    The third instance is 2323 chadath khad-ath’ (Aramaic) corresponding to
    2319; new:–new and is found in this verse: “4With three rows of great
    stones, and a row of new timber: and let the expenses be given out of the
    king’s house: 5And also let the golden and silver vessels of the house of
    God, which Nebuchadnezzar took forth out of the temple which is at
    Jerusalem, and brought unto Babylon, be restored, and brought again unto the
    temple which is at Jerusalem, every one to his place, and place them in the
    house of God.” Ezr 6:4-5

    The fourth instance is 2961 tariy taw-ree’ from an unused root apparently
    meaning to be moist; properly, dripping; hence, fresh (i.e. recently made
    such):–new, putrefying. This word is used in the verse “15And he found a
    NEW jawbone of an ass, and put forth his hand, and took it, and slew a
    thousand men therewith.”Judges 15:15

    In each of these instances, the words I have given were used just a single
    time, in the verses given.

    Then I made an interesting discovery. The next word is 8492 tiyrowsh
    tee-roshe’ or tiyrosh {tee-roshe’}; from 3423 in the sense of expulsion;
    must or fresh grape-juice (as just squeezed out); by implication (rarely)
    fermented wine:–(new, sweet) wine. This word is translated “new wine” in
    13 verses. In other words, if you look up “new” in the verse Proverbs 3:10
    and then “wine” in that same verse, you are given the number 8492 for the
    word “new” and again for the word “wine.” In other words, “new” is not one
    Hebrew word and then “wine” another. “Tiyrowsh” means “new wine.” Here are
    some verses so that you may look for yourself:

    “39For the children of Israel and the children of Levi shall bring the
    offering of the corn, of the NEW WINE, and the oil, unto the chambers, where
    are the vessels of the sanctuary, and the priests that minister, and the
    porters, and the singers: and we will not forsake the house of our God.” Ne
    10:39

    “10So shall thy barns be filled with plenty, and thy presses shall burst out
    with NEW WINE.” Pr 3:10

    “11Whoredom and wine and NEW WINE take away the heart.” Ho 4:11

    With this discovery fresh in mind, I approached the next word 2320 chodesh
    kho’-desh from 2318; the new moon; by implication, a month:–month(-ly), new
    moon. Again, I found that there is not one Hebrew word for “new” and another
    for “moon,” but a single Hebrew word translated “new moon” in 24 verses. I
    have given four verses as examples so that you may look for yourself.

    “5And David said unto Jonathan, Behold, to morrow is the NEW MOON, and I
    should not fail to sit with the king at meat: but let me go, that I may hide
    myself in the field unto the third day at even.” 1 Sam 20:5

    “23And he said, Wherefore wilt thou go to him to day? it is neither NEW
    MOON, nor sabbath. And she said, It shall be well.” 2 Ki 4:23

    “3Blow up the trumpet in the NEW MOON, in the time appointed, on our solemn
    feast day.” Ps 81:3

    “23And it shall come to pass, that from one NEW MOON to another, and from
    one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the
    LORD.” Isa 66:23

    But there’s more! While the word chodesh is translated “new moon” in 24
    instances, in another 217 it is simply translated “month.”

    “4And the ark rested in the seventh MONTH, on the seventeenth day of the
    month, upon the mountains of Ararat.” Gen 8:4

    “19And the people came up out of Jordan on the tenth day of the first MONTH,
    and encamped in Gilgal, in the east border of Jericho.” Jos 4:19

    At this point, I find it simply illogical that one can conclude that because
    “chodesh” means “new moon” and “month” that therefore the “new” of “New
    covenant” in Jer 31:31 means “renew.” But we will continue the study…

    The final word translated “new” in the Old Testament is 2319 chadash
    khaw-dawsh’ from 2318; new:–fresh, new thing. There are 45 instances of
    this word, one of them the Jeremiah verse in question:

    “31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a NEW covenant
    with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:” Jer 31:31

    It would indeed change our understanding of this important promise if we
    understand “new” to mean “renew.” But are we being honest with the other
    uses of this word if we take it to mean renew?

    “8Now there arose up a NEW king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.” Ex 1:8

    “11And he said unto her, If they bind me fast with NEW ropes that never were
    occupied, then shall I be weak, and be as another man.” Judg 16:11

    “3Sing unto him a NEW song; play skilfully with a loud noise.” Ps 33:3

    “19Behold, I will do a NEW thing; now it shall spring forth; shall ye not
    know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the
    desert.” Isa 43:19

    Clearly, the word “new” that is used in Jer 31:31 must be understood to mean
    “fresh, new thing” if the other instances of that same word are to make any
    sense at all.

    But to be fair, let’s consider the word “renew.” “Renew” is translated 10
    times from just two Hebrew words. Three times it is translated from 2498
    chalaph khaw-laf’ a primitive root; properly, to slide by, i.e. (by
    implication) to hasten away, pass on, spring up, pierce or change:–abolish,
    alter, change, cut off, go on forward, grow up, be over, pass (away, on,
    through), renew, sprout, strike through in these verses:

    “31But they that wait upon the LORD shall RENEW their strength; they shall
    mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they
    shall walk, and not faint.” Isa 40:31

    “1Keep silence before me, O islands; and let the people RENEW their
    strength: let them come near; then let them speak: let us come near together
    to judgment.” Isa 41:1

    “20My glory was fresh in me, and my bow was RENEWED in my hand.” Job 29:20

    The other seven times, “renew” was translated from 2318 chadash khaw-dash’ a
    primitive root; to be new; causatively, to rebuild:–renew, repair.

    “14Then said Samuel to the people, Come, and let us go to Gilgal, and RENEW
    the kingdom there.” 1 Sam 11:14

    “10Create in me a clean heart, O God; and RENEW a right spirit within me.”
    Ps 51:10

    “21Turn thou us unto thee, O LORD, and we shall be turned; RENEW our days as
    of old.” La 5:21

    “8And when Asa heard these words, and the prophecy of Oded the prophet, he
    took courage, and put away the abominable idols out of all the land of Judah
    and Benjamin, and out of the cities which he had taken from mount Ephraim,
    and RENEWED the altar of the LORD, that was before the porch of the LORD.” 2
    Ch 15:8

    “5Who satisfieth thy mouth with good things; so that thy youth is RENEWED
    like the eagle’s.” Ps 103:5

    “17Thou RENEWEST thy witnesses against me, and increasest thine indignation
    upon me; changes and war are against me.” Job 10:17

    ” 30Thou sendest forth thy spirit, they are created: and thou RENEWEST the
    face of the earth” Ps 104:30

    Since I have engaged in this study, I stand convinced that the “new” in Jer
    31:31 does indeed mean “fresh, new thing” rather than “renew.”

  11. Hi Kimberly -

    AWESOME word study! I’ll link to the comment as an article on the Articles Page. Thanks for sharing your findings with JGIG =o).

    Grace and peace,
    Wendy at JGIG

  12. A nice clear example of this is to be found in Lamentations 5:21: “Turn us back to You, O LORD, and we will be restored; Renew our days as of old,” The Hebrew for the word renew here is “chadesh”. If we go to the Septuagint version of Lamentations 5:21, a translation into Greek by the 70 Rabbis of the Sanhedrin, we find the word used to translate the Hebrew “chadesh” is the Greek “anakainison”.Likewise in Titus 3:4-5″But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness,but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal [anakainosis,] of the Holy Spirit”
    In Lk 22:20, “This cup is the New Covenant in my blood” the Greek original text uses what is basically the same word “kainos”.
    “So we do not lose heart. Though our outer nature is wasting away , our inner nature is
    being renewed [anakainoō] (by God) day by day” (2 Corinthians 4:16).
    And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed (metamorphoo) by the renewing (anakainosis) of your mind, that you may prove (dokimazo) what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect. (see note Romans 12:2)
    Colossians 3:10 and have put on the new self who is being renewed (anakainoo) to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created him

    • The point of the post is to clearly differentiate “new” and “renewed” using key passages and their original language in relation to the issue of the New Covenant being indeed new.

      You write:

      In Lk 22:20, “This cup is the New Covenant in my blood” the Greek original text uses what is basically the same word “kainos”.

      You state that “anakainosis” (as used in Titus 3:5) is “basically the same word ‘kainos’ (as used in Luke 22:20)”. Not so, as is the point of the entire post.

      To clarify for the reader:

      anakainosis (an-ak-ah’-ee-no-sis)
      renewing
      ἀνακαινώσει ἀνακαινώσεως
      From anakainoo; renovation — renewing.

      anakainoo (an-ak-ahee-no’-o) renew
      ἀνακαινούμενον ἀνακαινοῦται
      From ana and a derivative of kainos; to renovate — renew.

      kainos (kahee-nos’) new
      καινὰ καιναῖς καινὴ καινὴν καινῆς καινὸν καινότερον καινοῦ καινούς καινῷ
      Of uncertain affinity; new (especially in freshness; while neos is properly so with respect to age) — new.

      It is clear that the word kainos used in Luke 22:20 indicates not something renovated or renewed, but something new, fresh . . . not something changed, but something, well, new =o)! While “new” and “renewed” are clearly related as words, they have meanings specific to their use.

      -JGIG

  13. If you look at Vine’s Expository Dictionary of the “New Testament” (that represents Kittel etc.) you will find that “Kainos” can also mean “expanded.” When Y’shua said that He came to fulfill (plaroma)the Law, is is better translated to “fill the Law full.”

    In that Matthew 5:17 conext He “Expands” on what He meant by Expanding the Law – not lessening or “abolishing it.” “You hav heard that it was said: ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But, I tell you that anyone who enduges his lust (present tense – continuous “action”) for her has already committed adultery in his heart.” There are a number of other expansions in Matthew 5.

  14. I think if this was the intent of the word in the New Covenant passages – that there would be some evidence of teaching the Law of Moses to the Gentiles. There is not a shred of evidence of this -and in fact quite a bit of scriptural support for the opposite situation. None of the shadow laws were carried over into the New Covenant. Old Contract fulfilled (Romans 7) New one in place (The entire book of Hebrews). But if all I had to go on was Matthew 5. Maybe. =)

  15. I am aware this discussion is over a year old, however the truth that Shaul ‘Paul’ of Tarsus is a liar and an Anti Messiah is over 2000 years old. It is so sad to see the lie perpertrated tha the Torah is not binding on all men. The sin of the world is not keeping the Commandments. The only route to Yahweh (God) the Father is through repentence and obedience to His Commandments, Do not let Yahshua’s wonderful promise that He is the Way, the TRUTH and the LIFE be nullified by the devil Paul the self appointed and false apostle. There is no law of Christ there is only the TORAH. Should you wish for any more information (and I once thought like you) I will willingly prove to you that you are being misled on a wide road which is almost beyond comprehension – that the deception is so clever – that indeed we have been warned that it will deceive almost the entire world. The Chosen of Yahweh has always been His people, the Renewed Covenant is with his people. Christians, Muslims and the like have no part in this truth unless they are part of the Household of the Most High Elohim – YAHWEH.

    • Thank you, Red, for your comment that so beautifully demonstrates some of the thinking in the Hebrew Roots/Messianic movements. Welcome to JGIG.

      A few questions:

      1) Can you please provide Scripture to support your assertion that “The only route to Yahweh (God) the Father is through repentance and obedience to His Commandments”?

      2) How did you arrive at the particular ‘sacred names’ that you use (Yahweh and Yahshua)?

      3) What proof have you “that Shaul ‘Paul’ is a liar and an Anti-Messiah”?

      4) Where is the Scriptural evidence for the claims you make above? Without contextual Scripture to back up your claims, that is all they are – your claims.

      5) Regarding the Law of Christ . . . Kimberly, who did the second part of the word study on this post, also makes this observation:

      “If you love Me, you will keep MY commandments.” John 14:15

      “He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose myself to him” John 14:21

      ” If anyone loves Me, he will keep my word and My Father will love him and We will come to him and make Our abode with him.” John 14:22

      “You are my friends if you do what I command you.” John 15:14

      So yes, the Greek NT would agree that love can be understood as keeping commandments.

      BUT, from the mouth of Jesus Himself, we hear these words:

      “If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, JUST AS I HAVE KEPT MY FATHER’S COMMANDMENTS and abide in His love” John 15:10

      Jesus himself teaches that HIS (Jesus’) commandments ARE DIFFERENT than HIS FATHER’S commandments. Jesus makes this distinction himself. Accepting Jesus accepts God, And we obey Jesus in the same way Jesus obeys God. Jesus does not point us to the Torah…he points us to HIMSELF.

      And what are Jesus’ commandments?

      “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another.” John 13:34

      “This is my commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you.” John 15:13

      “This I command you, that you love one another.” John 15:17

      The assertions (and what I consider to be sound conclusions) made above are based on the words of Jesus Christ, not of Paul. Take another look at the Scriptures – without your HRM specs on.

      Grace and peace,
      -JGIG

      • I am not sure about all the claims that Red is making above. But I will answer at least some of what I agree with.

        His pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton of “Yahweh” is his attempt at sounding out the only name of the one most call “God”. You can find His name given clearly in Exodus 3:15. Everywhere in modern Bibles that you see “LORD” in capitals was originally Yod-Hey-Vav (or Waw) – Hey. The name of “Jesus”, as I’m sure you know, was not the Messiah’s name. Most would believe that it was pronounced Yeshua in the Aramaic or Yod-Shin-Vav-Ayin, the long form is the same as the prophet most refer to as “Joshua” or Yahoshua, whose name means ‘Yah (or Yahweh) saves’ or ‘Yah is salvation / Yah saves’. Regardless if Red was pronouncing it properly or not, it is more than obvious that God’s name isn’t God and Jesus’ real name isn’t Jesus.. however, the significance of using His real name would be something you personally would consider and determine. Just know when you say ‘halleluyah’ you are saying in Hebrew ‘praise you Yah’.

        When Red is talking about the only way, referring to repentance and obedience.. well, I assume he is referring to scripture where Y’shua said ‘unless you repent, you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven’ and when asked how to have eternal life, Y’shua said to obey the commandments, love Yahweh your Elohim with all your heart mind soul and strength. The word Teshuvah used for repentance is to return to Yahweh and away from sin, to ‘love’ God is to obey Him.

        I don’t necessarily subscribe to the idea that Shaul was a liar or false prophet. I appreciate his writings, but I understand that they are hard to understand as Peter said in 2 Peter 3:15-17 and that many twist Shaul (Paul’s) writings to their own destruction. Peter then says to be careful not to fall into lawlessness. If Paul’s teachings and Y’shua’s teachings conflict, I will always go with Y’shua’s teaching 100% of the time, but I think if we understand Paul’s teachings properly, they will not conflict.

        5. If Christ and the Father are the same, then His Law CANNOT be different than the Father’s Law, this would be impossible. If we say that “Jesus” and “God” are the same, then we MUST say their Law/s are the same and not different. If Y’shua had a different Law than Yahweh, He wouldn’t be a prophet and would be worthy of death (see Deut. 13:1-5). Also if Y’shua added to or took away from the Torah of Yahweh, He wouldn’t be perfect, as He would have broken the Law (see Deut. 12:32). He did not add to or take away, He only fulfilled and showed the proper way of doing so, correcting the errors of those who used Yahweh’s Torah incorrectly and instead followed man’s traditions as found in the Talmud etc. (also if you search church history, you will find that the catholic and protestant churches have also done the same thing.. look into Constantine’s Creed). You will find that all of the commandments that Y’shua gave are from the Torah or a perfect interpretation of the Torah. You will even find that when Satan tempted Y’shua in the wilderness, each time Y’shua fought against Satan with the Torah (Deut. 6 & 7 quotations).

        I hope that this message finds you with love and kindness and if it is truth from above that it is received and is edifying.

        I am aware that I did not take the time to give extensive scripture references for everything I wrote; however, they are there and I would be happy to provide them, given time.

        I would like to share with you this site that I feel will edify you and answer many questions about those who choose to obey God and follow Y’shua by doing what He did and living as He lived.

        [link to HRM site removed]

        One last thing… no one ever HAD to obey God’s Law, it was always a choice. His Law doesn’t save us, He saves us. Obeying Him is works that prove our Faith and prove our New Heart given to us from the New Covenant. Faith without works is dead.

        Hebrews 8:10 – This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my LAW in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
        Jeremiah 31:33 – But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the House of Israel after those days, says YHWH, I will put My Torah in their inward parts, and write it on their hearts; and will be their Elohim, and they shall be My People.

        If we reject His Law in our hearts, are we in this covenant?

      • Hi Joshua,

        Welcome to JGIG.

        The main thrust of your comment is that believers in the Old Testament are the same as believers in the New Testament – that Jesus just came to ‘renew’ that which was already in place. You use the word ‘teshuvah’ as ‘repent’ and then define it as ‘to turn back’. Well, ‘teshuvah’ does not mean ‘repent’:

        Strong’s H8666 – tĕshuwbah –
        1) a recurrence, an answer, return
        a) return
        1) completion of a year, return of a year
        b) at the return (construct)
        c) answer, reply

        Teshuwbah is occurs 8 times in 8 verses in the OT, and not one of those times does it mean ‘repent’, which makes sense since ‘repent’ is not one of the definitions for ‘teshuwbah’. Yet the Hebrew Roots Movement has built an entire doctrine on the false definition of one word!

        The word ‘repent’, in both the OT and the NT, has nothing to do with ‘return’ or ‘turn back’, and everything to do with a change of mind and heart, and remorse for sin. I’m working on an upcoming post regarding this very issue. Pop the word ‘repent’ in the ‘Word or Verse’ search box HERE and do a word study. You might be surprised to see what you find!

        Again, the main thrust of your comment is that believers in the Old Testament are the same as believers in the New Testament – that Jesus just came to ‘renew’ that which was already in place.

        That is simply not the case. In Christ, God did something far and beyond what He did through Moses.

        From Old Testament Believers and New Testament Christians by James Fowler:

        Positing as their starting-point the statement of “the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8), some have argued that the redemptive work of Jesus Christ has been accomplished in the “eternality” of the pre-creation past. The “benefits” of Christ’s redemptive work are therefore alleged to be applicable to the believers of the Old Testament. The grace of God is said to have been receivable by faith so as to effect regeneration, salvation, righteousness and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. All of the Christian “benefits” become “virtual reality” for the Hebrew peoples of the Old Testament.

        Apart from challenging their Gnostic conception of time and history, the first question should be a textual and exegetical challenge to their initial premise in utilization of the text in Revelation 13:8. The King James Version translates the phrase, “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world,” but newer English translations such as the Revised Standard Version (RSV) and the New American Standard Bible (NASB) recognize that the prepositional phrase “from the foundation of the world” is more correctly applied as qualifying the verb action of “those who names are written in the book of life.” Thus the NASB translates Rev. 13:8, “everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.” This is consistent with John’s subsequent inspired usage of the same phrase in Revelation 17:8 when he mentions those “whose name has not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world.” Hermeneutic consistency all but eliminates the phrase referring to “the lamb slain before the foundation of the world” which has so often been theologically misapplied.

        Even if the KJV phrase were retained, it is theologically inadmissible to posit an actual crucifixion of Christ before time. Such becomes an abstract idea, a tenuous tenet, epistemological belief in which becomes entirely subjective and mystical. It is completely detached and divorced from historical objectivity and the ontological reality of the presence and activity of the risen Lord Jesus. When Christians begin to “play loose” with history and set up ethereal ideas outside of chronological time, then their belief-system is but an ideological abstraction that can be subjectively twisted to any existential end. When the “Lamb slain” is regarded as a pre-historical accomplishment, then the historical crucifixion of Jesus on a cross outside of Jerusalem becomes an unnecessary redundant enactment, a charade, a meaningless “acting out” or “play-acting.” God forbid that the death of Jesus Christ should be cast as such an abstraction in the eternal “absence of time,” rather than as an historical actuality within the linear time of human history.

        If the phrase referring to “the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world” is retained, it can mean nothing more than that in the foreknowledge of God it was predetermined that the Word should become flesh (John 1:14) and there would be an historic space/time crucifixion of the incarnate Son of God whereby He would vicariously take the death consequences of humanity’s sin upon Himself, and that in order to give His life (John 10:10) to men who would receive Him by faith. The historic space/time context is foundational to Christianity, else all becomes but a mythical, mystical abstraction. Christ-ianity must always be documented to be rooted in verifiable human history.

        The historical record of Scripture is based on a sequential chronology from past to future, from Genesis to Revelation. There are those who might not engage in Gnostic etherealizing and spiritualizing, but still trample on Biblical history by transferring Christian ideas of the new covenant back into the Old Testament. Such a retroactive importation allows them to interpolate New Testament ideas into their interpretation of the Old Testament. Thus they implement the interpretive technique of eisegesis (reading or leading into the text) rather than the acceptable hermeneutic technique of exegesis (deriving out of the text the reading or leading intended).

        Justification for this reverse projection of Christian realities is sometimes sought by appealing to the fact that God is “the same yesterday, today and forever” (Heb. 13:8). Indeed God is immutable in nature and character, but this is not to deny that God can make different choices and do something new and novel. Though God’s character never changes, He can change His modus operandi. God’s hands are not tied to precedent actions, nor are subsequent actions to be made equivalent or identical with all precedent actions. God is free, independent and spontaneous. So the “historical revisionism” that projects Christian realities back into the Old Testament era, and attributes to Hebrew believers all that has been made available to Christians in Christ, is invalid and dishonest. Those who thus reconstruct and taint the Biblical historical record are usually attempting to revise, rewrite and reinterpret Old Testament history so that it corresponds with their particular presuppositions of theology to support their particular ethical or eschatological agenda.
        The question must be asked again: If the Old Testament believers experienced all of the spiritual “benefits” that are derived from the redemptive mission of Jesus Christ, that in a retroactive “prior reality,” why then did Jesus need to become historically incarnate and be crucified? Did He “die needlessly” (Gal. 2:21), since everything was readily available? Paul could not accept such reasoning and neither can we.

        A more detailed consideration of some of these Christian realities that are often projected back into the Old Testament is now in order.

        The article cited is highly recommended. A great, meaty read.

        Everything else you posted has to do with mandating that New Testament Christians live like Old Testament believers. Scripture simply does not support that view.

        I did remove your link to 119 ministries. I’m familiar with the site and the videos there. They lost me when they posted a video advocating division in the Body of Christ and in that same video showing a proof-text progression claiming that Torah is God.

        Thanks for your comments,
        -JGIG

  16. Russ -

    If Jesus was indeed ‘upping the ante’ on the Law (which I believe He was doing), do you think He expected mankind to keep the Law any better than mankind had been able to keep it up to that point?

  17. Hi Wendy! Just got a notification that there was something new on this thread and my oh my there was a lot! Thanks for speaking to my Zechariah question – i didn’t know it was one of the HRM’s main points – it just popped up in my own reading – but i can see why. Still praying about this…

  18. I want to know what kind of a God would allow the witness of His truth to be corrupted to the degree that nearly everyone would be lost? (How is God going to get that great multitude without number from every tribe, tongue, and nation? Is Revelation true?) That sounds more like an intentional trap for God to allow that to happen. Why would He go to such lengths to save us through the death of the Son, in such a horrible way, only to conceal the details of that fact in a terrible lie that 99.999% of believers believe to be the inspired Word of God? But you ARE correct in that you cannot teach Torah observance as given to Moses as an obligation and believe Paul at the same time. You have that much correct. =)

  19. Thank you for the insightful word studies.

  20. Regarding this post, see my comment below [bracketed].
    [8thday4life (January 11, 2010 at 10:53 am) I think if this was the intent of the word in the New Covenant passages – that there would be some evidence of teaching the Law of Moses to the Gentiles. There is not a shred of evidence of this -and in fact quite a bit of scriptural support for the opposite situation...]

    Readers: Indeed, we do have the evidence some seek that the church revered the Law of Moses. In Acts 15:22, along with the letter composed by the Jerusalem Council to be delivered to the churches abroad, James stated, “…For we know that Moses has throughout many groups those who preach him well in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath.” Meaning, as I suppose, that the group felt no need for them to immediately observe every Law with the few exceptions they enumerated, and that they did Not believe God required of Gentile converts the pre-Law sign of circumcision; but that over time the church by way of its habit of attending synagogue teaching, would learn and observe more and more in their desire to please the LORD. Synagogues, that is, where this sect (Christians) of Judaism worshipped every Shabbat, later enjoying dinner and discussions as a sect on Saturdays as Sabbath closed.

    • A Trentham -

      A plain reading of Acts 15 does not in any way support the view that early Christians were progressively brought under the jurisdiction of the Mosaic Covenant Law. In fact the whole thrust of the chapter comes totally against that idea.

      Does that mean that the Law of Moses was not revered? No, of course not. Does it mean that Moses was taught in the synagogues? Yes, of course it was! And what happened to Paul and the others when they showed how Christ fulfilled the Law as they preached in the synagogues? Oft times they were driven out of not only the synagogue but also the city in which they were preaching! Read through Acts and see how often they were persecuted for preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

      When you say, “Meaning, as I suppose . . . “ indicates that you’re willing to play fast and loose with the text instead of just letting the text speak for itself. Let’s look at the four things that early believers were exhorted to abide by:

      28It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.

      No mention of keeping a seventh-day Sabbath, no circumcision, no Feast keeping. Those issues were Mosaic Covenant Law-keeping 101! If early believers were indeed to attend the synagogue to learn the ways of the Mosaic Covenant Law over time it would seem a glaring omission that the seventh-day Sabbath was not included in the Apostles’ letter of instruction! To reinforce this key point: If new believers were to be schooled in the keeping of the Mosaic Covenant Law in the synagogues (where Moses was preached), why was the Sabbath not one of the things commanded to new believers in the Apostles’ letter??

      The four things spoken of in the Apostles’ letter were more likely for new believers just coming out of idolatry to abide by so as not to offend Jewish believers.

      Keeping the Mosaic Covenant Law was/is not something which God expected/expects of believers. The Law of Christ is now in effect: Love God, love others, make disciples. Love fulfills the Law (Romans 13).

      Dear reader, please read the full texts of Acts 15 and Romans 13.

      Dear believer, don’t let anyone “10 . . . try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear? 11No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

      God does not require the keeping of the Mosaic Covenant Law in order to please Him. In Christ, love fulfills the Law!

      May God grant you wisdom and discernment as you consider all of these things.

      -JGIG

      • JGIG…you mentioned Romans 13…and Paul very specifically states that he is ONLY speaking to those who KNOW THE LAW….so if you do not know the law that you cannot possibly understand what Paul is saying.

      • please see this video that greatly helps to clear up Acts 15

        [link to HRM video removed]
        Note to Joshua and other Law keeping commenters: I appreciate your desire to promote HRM teachings here, but I will not post links to HRM teachings here at JGIG unless I’m doing a review of a specific teaching. No harm, no foul . . . just letting you know. -JGIG

  21. Hi Jeff,

    I’m glad you’ve found the word studies here helpful =o). I can’t take credit for this one, though . . . some good friends who are better at the language thing than I am contributed to this post. I fare better at concepts . . . and find language studies to be tedious – they’re just not my ‘thing’, though I’ll do them when need be.

    Sheep wrecked and Kimberly from Maine did the leg work on the language study for this post, both to and for whom I give continuing thanks!

    Blessings,
    -JGIG

  22. good afternoon everyone. it matters not what this words exact definition is. being biligual i understand one must also think in the culture of the language being referenced, and not just look up the word defination. being as such, i don’t think anyone here is an ancient israelite, therefore not qualified to give definitions of lexicons. but i digress. the torah is not the covenant but part of it. abraham was given the covenant, but not the torah. that was given to his descendants, more then 400 years later. so even if jeremiah did prophesy of a new covenant, that doesn’t mean god is going to change his laws and commandments just to fit our lazyless and lack of desire to get up and commit ourselves. god is not a man to lie, or change his mind, and he is certainly not going to change the rules of house just because his spoiled unruley children refuse to follow directions. no one can perfectly translate the bible. you must learn hebrew, not just the language, but the culture as well to fully understand the teachings in it. blessings be upon you all.

    • Hi Jeremiah,

      Actually, words mean things and it absolutely does matter what a word’s definition is. And when determining a specific word’s meaning from another language, context is sooo important to consider, something that those in Law ‘keeping’ sects tend to consistently overlook.

      Nowhere in the Scriptures does it tell us that we must look at the Scriptures through any cultural lens. God deals with mankind through His Word with issues common to mankind: sin, redemption, righteousness, death, life . . . All of those issues are common to mankind and everyone can relate to the Gospel, no matter their culture.

      You are correct, God does not change. He has changed the way He has dealt with His people over time, though, that is indisputable.

      Blessings to you as well, Jeremiah,

      -JGIG

  23. christians and their mental gymnastics…did you know that to the ancient israelites death of the body was a sympton NOT a cause. adam dying physically was a symptom of being seperated from god. hebrew understanding of dying is literally to be seperated from god. in all the english translations of the bible you never get this. why? because to gentiles to die is, simply that. you see, this is one of those cultural things you just said doesn’t mean squack. or how about the word holy? did you know holy means to be seperate as well? it doesn’t good, or rightous, or denote any sense of purity. it just means rightous. you don’t get this in english translations. or how about the name adam? that means red, or blood. so was adam a white man as depicted by every gentile christian on the face of this planet? obviously not. christians don’t reject torah because god told them too, they do it because they don’t feel like it and are lazy. christians are like unruly concubine that brings her old lovers to her bridegrooms be chamber at night, not knowing he knows her adulterous secret. in the end she will be cut off. this is god’s house. not pauls, or benny hins. god’s. and if you don’t like his rules, there’s the door.

    i’m not trying to tell the gentiles they have to cut their forskin off, and become jews, i’m just saying that i’m sick of christians saying one thing, and doing something else. it’s a bad habit that makes people like me who seperate themselves for their true love look bad.

    my god have the diligence to open your eyes.

  24. The biggest problem with your article is that you completely misunderstand what most Torah observant people are saying. No one is saying that obedience to Torah is what saves. Clearly the blood atones for our sin. The Torah was never for salvation. It is the covenant between man and YHWH. Yeshua is the sacrifice for those int eh covenant. It is in the Torah that the sacrifice is even prescribed. If you reject the covenant you have rejected the blood. If you reject the covenant you make yourself ineligible to be washed by the blood. The blood is only for those in the covenant from which it is prescribed. The pagans hanging out their clothes were not watching the priests bringing in the lambs to the temple for sacrifice thinking that the blood of that lamb applied to them. They knew that it applied to those in the covenant prescribing it. The opposite of law is not grace. Lawlessness is. The opposite of grace is not law. Punishment is. So law goes with grace and punishment goes with lawlessness. You basically teach that the Messiah had to come to protect us from the covenant! There was NEVER anything wrong with the covenant YHWH gave His bride. The problem was WITH US. Torah is the covenant and Yeshua is the sacrifice for those in the covenant. You are posing things as opposites that are parallels! YHWH’S Torah is not a burden nor does the word, when correctly read, ever defining it as such! It is a delight and YHWH can be trusted.

    • And one last thing. Sin is defined as the transgression of the law. I know that the blood of the Messiah is ENOUGH to atone form my sin for when I do fail and transgress the law. I do not believe that there is anything other than the blood that can wash me clean from my sin but for that blood. The issue here is who does the blood apply to and what do you think sin is? It is ALWAYS defined in the word at the TRANSGRESSION OF THE LAW.

    • Hi Robin,

      Welcome to JGIG.

      You wrote these statements: “No one is saying that obedience to Torah is what saves.”, “The Torah was never for salvation.”, and “If you reject the covenant you make yourself ineligible to be washed by the blood.”

      When you wrote this, “If you reject the covenant you make yourself ineligible to be washed by the blood.”, you just fatally contradicted yourself. For you, salvation is clearly a Jesus + Law equation, or one is not saved.

      There’s really nothing left to say.

      Blessings,
      -JGIG

      • Y’shua said he lays down His life for His friends.

        who are His friends?

        Those who do the will of the Father.

        no matter how you cut it, something must be DONE to receive the atonement, even if it’s saying a simple prayer.

      • I agree, Joshua. We do need to respond to Jesus and the Work that He did at the Cross:

        Romans 10:9-14
        9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

        Blessings,
        -JGIG

  25. I have read these posts and am just amazed at how confused this all sounds. Have you ever thought that this could just be wrong. The God of Israel is certainly not the god of the new testament. To try and mix the two to say that there is no salvation in the Torah is just plain wrong. Of course there is salvation in the Torah – there is absolutely no need for a mythical god to die for ones sins. We are each accountable for our own sin, and nobody can die for another sins. Unless born Jewish all gentiles are Noahides and we are all under the 7 Laws of Noah. Sadly this has not been taught though the concept of Noahides is thousands of years old. God did not abandon the gentiles as Paul would have you believe – there has always been provision without the lies of the new testament for all gentiles. When one can see this – it so much easier to understand that there is no need for a saviour to die for sin then the man in moon doing a jig. The God of Israel has not changed. Only man has perverted the truth and distorted the way to God. The same salvation for all men is still current and will not change. For the God of Israel is unchangeable.

  26. Yhon are you aware that The most earliest education rabbis, believe in suffer messiah for sins? Are you aware david said about The messiah, his flesh would not see decay? no mythology here! just you denying scripture and what the other rabbis taught.

  27. Travis, I cannot agree with your statement “The most earliest education rabbis, believe in suffer messiah for sins?” On the contrary it is the very opposite, the Jews know what to expect of their Messiah for the Tanach clearly tells them what to expect:
    Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because;

    1) Jesus did not fulfil the messianic prophecies

    2) Christianity contradicts the Jewish theology

    3) Jesus did not embody the personal qualification of Messiah

    4) Biblical verses “referring to Jesus are mistranslations

    5) Jewish belief is based on national revelation

    Jesus did not fulfill the Messianic Prophecies

    What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? The Bible says that he will:

    A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekeil 37:26-28)

    B. Gather all Jews back to the land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6)

    C. User in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: “nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore.” (Isaiah 2:4)

    D. Spread universal knowledge of the G-d of Israel – uniting the entire human race as one. As it says: “G-d will be King over all the world on that day, G-d will be One and His Name will be ONE” (Zechariah 14:9)

    The historical fact is that Jesus fulfilled NONE of these Messianic prophecies.

    A careful reading from a correct Hebrew Bible will show you that Psalm 16 is about King David, it is not prophetic in any shape or form about any Messiah.
    Verse 10 is associated with 8 and 9, and they really are one idea.

    8: I have placed HaShem before me always and He is at my right hand shall not be moved.
    [Because I have constantly held fast to HaShem and He has been my protector I shall not fail.]

    9: Therefore my heart is happy, my honor rejoices and my flesh will rest in confidence.
    [Because of what he says in 8, his heart and soul (honor-kavod) rejoice and his body knows that after death it is secured.]

    10: Because you will not abandon my soul to the Sheol, you will not give your pious ones to see destruction.
    [Though my body will go to the grave, my soul will not see destruction. ]

    Warmest
    Yhon

  28. Dear Moderator – I sent a post on the 6th June 2011 – which you have not put on the forum – can I ask why please – as I certainly was not rude or abrasive – just truthful.

    The post was addressed to Travis on June 1st. 2011 – please will you respond to this reply. I was asked a question – and I have answered it. I am puzzled as to why you did not post my answer?

    Warm regards

    Yhon

    • Hi Yhon and Travis,

      My apologies for the delay in posting your comment, Yhon . . . please use the ‘reply’ button if you’re conversing with another poster – it makes it much easier for me to follow along to see if a comment is appropriate in either in light of the original post or if you’re conversing with another poster. Not seeing Travis’ post with yours made yours look a little out of the blue and didn’t seem related to the original post, which is why I didn’t post it. It’s not related to the OP, really, but you were responding to another poster, so I did go ahead and approve it.

      Using the reply button makes it much easier for the reader and me (!) to follow along.

      Thanks, guys =o),
      -JGIG

    • also to note the dead sea scrolls debunked The idea that anyone including christians change the bible

  29. Yhon Jetley Marks i suggest you read this site, it deals with most of what you had said.

    http://realmessiah.com/answers_to_objections.

    also http://christianthinktank.com/bad53.html, that site has more things then this that deals with The messiah.

    http://christianthinktank.com/messiah.html

    http://www.gotquestions.org/suffering-servant-Isaiah-53.html

  30. 1) The Torah has not been done away. It will be in play during the 1000 years for the survivors of the Tribulation & the Wrath who were never born again, so must obey thru the power of their flesh.

    2) It’s OUR FLESHLY NATURE that has been done away.

    3) We have been crucified with Messiah. Our old nature of flesh (Torah of Moses is kept in the flesh) is dead. A dead person is not required to keep ANY law.

    4) We were raised from the dead with Messiah as a completely NEW CREATION—a type of Being which did NOT EXIST when the Torah was given to Moses.

    5) As a new creation we have a new Torah. We are now Spirit Beings, with a Spirit Nature. Our Torah is now of the more powerful Spirit and no longer the weaker Flesh.

    6) The New Covenant is not about a new set of Laws, it’s about a completely new Person—a Person with the Eternal Life of YHWH dwelling within them.

    7) We are commanded to die to ourselves so the Life of Messiah can bear the Fruit of the Spirit within us unhampered. The works of the Flesh cannot produce the Fruit of the Spirit.

    8) The New Covenant is the New Birth of a New Person who is filled with the Nature and clothed with the Glory of our Creator and Father.

  31. I just read this post for the second time, this time several months after my own experience with the misguided legalism that is the Hebrew Roots Movement. I am so grateful for your site, and I’m still processing just how much this mentality has infiltrated my former church.

    God bless you!

  32. i wasn’t going to say anything, however after reading the article, i found that the writer doesn’t know what they are talking about. the ancient hebrew people where a primitive people, much like native americans. in fact if the writer actually knew hebrew they would know that the bible never uses abstracts, only concretes to demonstrate ideas. the word chadash (perfect 3rd person for lechadosh) never means ‘new’ in the sense that christians are thinking. the hebrew were cyclic thinking and would have never used it in that context. in fact jesus/ yeshua once said that you had to put new wine into new wine skins. if we think like hebrews and not like greeks, we would know that chadash can also mean to repair, or make fresh, meaning you can put wine into broken wine skins, it must first be repaired. the author should seriously leave biblical commentary to those that have actually done the studies necessary to MAKE appropriate comments, and not just voice their opinions.

    • I have a question for you: How does one repair a burst wineskin?

      Jesus said this:

      Mark 2:21-22
      21 “No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, making the tear worse. 22 And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. No, he pours new wine into new wineskins.”

      Jesus said that putting new wine into an old wineskin will ruin the old wineskin – both the wine and the wineskin are lost – there is no mention of repair of old wineskins. Not sure where you’re getting that idea. Once a wineskin has burst, it is lost.

      As for your opinion about the post, “Hebrew Roots Movement – New Covenant or ‘Renewed’ Covenant”, the post stands on its own merits. You’ve offered no linguistic proof (just your say-so) to counter the conclusions drawn by the study. I found your comment a bit humorous considering your last line: “the author should seriously leave biblical commentary to those that have actually done the studies necessary to MAKE appropriate comments, and not just voice their opinions.” . . . after writing pure opinion presenting no evidence while critiquing an actual study. There are actually two studies relayed in the post, each with a different style of study, yet each coming to the same conclusion. If you read through the post carefully, you will see that even in Hebraic thought, the concept of something completely new, original, and fresh is not a concept lost on the Hebrew mindset; the Hebraic mindset was able to distinguish between cycles and completely new things.

  33. Yikes!! I don’t know what translation you are using for Colossians 2:13-17, but it has completely skewed the proper interpretation of the verse. It should read:

    Colossians 2:13-17
    When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, having canceled out the CERTIFICATE OF DEBT consisting of decrees against us, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

    Your translation reads:
    He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us

    Totally different! It was the certificate of debt that was nailed to the cross, not the Law. The Torah WAS NOT nailed to the cross. In other words, it was the penalty of the law that was nailed to cross, not the law itself!!

    I pray this is an innocent error. May Yah have mercy on you.

    • Hi Jody,
      Welcome to JGIG =o).

      I used the NIV there, and you are using the NASB. Here’s the KJV, just to give an example of another widely used version:

      Colossians 2:13-17
      13And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

      16Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

      What ultimately stood against us? Sin. And Jesus dealt with sin in a primary sense, restoring the Life lost at the Fall. Sin stands against mankind, and because of sin, the Law also stands against mankind, and having dealt with sin, Jesus also renders the Law obsolete for those who put their faith and trust in Him (Hebrews 8). From 12 Undeniable Truths That Drive Law ‘Keepers’ Crazy, item #5:

      5. It was our SIN that was nailed to the Cross, not just man’s additions to or the curses of the Law. What was blotted out and nailed to the cross? What stood against us? Convicting us in the sight of God? That which the Law defines – SIN. Law Keepers assert that Christ merely nailed human traditions added to the Law or just the curse of the Law to the Cross. Jesus accomplished so much more than that.

      **This entry has been edited after a fellow contender for the faith corrected me. They say it best, so I’ll post what they wrote to me here (Many thanks CIAN!):

      “The LOM did NOT die on the cross, Jesus did, and through HIS death on our behalf, all believers have DIED as well — The LOM is NOT dead, but WE are DEAD to IT (a crucial distinction) … It is our SINS which Jesus took upon His own head on the cross when He became SIN for us (He did NOT become the LOM) — I think that is a pivotal point to keep in the forefront of our thinking as we read this passage & others relating to it … WHAT is REMOVED in Col.2:11 ??? NOT the LOM (!!!) but our body of flesh, our body of dead works, our body of SIN … The decrees certified against us in verse 14 have been CANCELLED out and taken away (Because our Transgressions were forgiven, having been Nailed to the Cross in HIS Body) and the charges have been dropped against US since they were levied upon Jesus (in our stead) who PAID our DEBT BOND, He Himself being the Surety Forfeited because of our DEFAULT.”

      Seeing that human tradition carries no authority to convict man in God’s sight and sin does, that it was merely human tradition or just the curse of the Law that Law ’keepers’ assert was nailed to the cross simply fails in light of the facts and the context. Once sin is washed away, the Law is done with us . . . it has led us to the Cross – and there we become a New Creation! We no longer have the same relationship with the Law as we did before the work of Christ in our lives!

      Colossians 2:9-15
      9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10 and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority. 11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

      13 When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, 14 having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. 15 And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

      I’m not quite sure what your issue with the version quoted is; the result is the same. 2 Corinthians 5:21 says, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”; Colossians 2 says that Jesus took that which stood against us, was hostile toward us, to the Cross. That’s sin, and by default, that which is against us because of sin (“Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions,” Gal. 3:19) – He dealt with it ALL at the Cross.

      Grace and peace,
      -JGIG

    • how do you deal with this verse

      phesians 2:15

      Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)

      15the enmity in his flesh, the law of the commands in ordinances having done away, that the two he might create in himself into one new man, making peace,

      is The penalty of the law mention or just The law it self?

      Also it this verse it not referring to traditions of man Because it was The Law that separated The nation of israel from Gentiles.

  34. Please allow me to have a word on this topic.

    First Covenant
    The point of Sinai Covenant was the promised land and prosperous life in the same land in return of obedience to the known commandments. There was not much about any salvation at all there! Sudducies and Faresies even had an argument about resurrection of the dead. They did not know for sure! The question of Salvation was at the level of guessing and assumption because it simply was not the subject of Torah (Law). Nevertheless this has helped to create the environment where the Seed could be delivered.

    Second Covenant
    Yahushua has come with another Covenant with a better promise of eternal life, salvation from the death. We just need to believe in his glorious sacrifice and accept the gift of Ruach Ha Codesh in order to guide us through the challenges of this world. Yahusha explains this as being born again with YHWH after the initial separation after Adam. According to this Covenant we restored to the family of YHWH through Yhusha, allowed to enter through the gates, but not to the promised land!

    Mosaic Law vs Law of Spirit
    The Law of Spirit (The Law of Ruach Ha Codesh) works in ourselves and answers instantly without any need of going back to the books and looking for an answer. Law of Ruach Ha Codesh gives better answers than the Law of Moses does. For example, it would be more pleasing for YHWH if you not just murder not, but do not hate at all (which is murder!). Another example (of my own :) if you come across bird’s nest with mother and babies, it would be holier to leave the the whole family along. According to the Mosaic Law, we have to release the mother bird only, and take the kids for food or whatever. And so on, and so on..

    The Law of Ruach is all encompassing and proceeds directly from the Father. This is how the family of the heavenly hosts live! Please understand that this Mosaic Law is not contradicted by the law of Ruach if you take it properly and without hipocracy.

    • I also would like to add to my post above that all Scriptures are pure and holy. I do use it for the studies and it is of the greatest authority!. Please remember that the Scriptures are no subject to interpretation by any man because it was written by Rouch!

      This simply means we can understand the writings only if we ourselves are subjects to the Rouch herself! We should be “under the Law of Ruach”. Please understand that only true congregations, established by Yahusha Himself and proceeding from Himself (THE LAWGIVER, LEGISLATOR) has a deposit of Rouch Ha Codesh leaving within the congregation. Such congregation should have trustworthy doctrine and interpretation.

      Such understanding has led me to search for “right” church after braking away from HRM. After certain study I have come to the…..Orthodox Church which seems to be the most initial in the teaching and had no changes since after 7th ecumenical council.
      It seems to have many “pagan things” and looks like fallen away… but now I think that my understanding might be fallen away rather that theirs.

    • Correct – the laws given to Moses at Sinai are not contradicted by the New Covenenant. The New Covenant obviously is not all-inclusive of the laws given to Moses at Sinai, either; the sacrificial and punitive laws are now obsolete in Christ. Just as those regulations are now obsolete, so are the mandatory edicts to keep Feasts, days, and dietary laws; any laws that God requires of us are now fulfilled by love:

      Romans 13:8-14
      8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, “Do not commit adultery,” “Do not murder,” “Do not steal,” “Do not covet,” and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
      11 And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. 12 The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13 Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. 14 Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.

  35. I almost never leave remarks, but I read a
    few of the remarks on Hebrew Roots Movement – New Covenant or �Renewed� Covenant?
    � Joyfully Growing in Grace. I do have 2 questions for you if it’s allright. Is it simply me or does it look as if like a few of these comments appear like they are left by brain dead people? :-P And, if you are writing at additional places, I would like to follow you. Would you make a list of all of your social sites like your twitter feed, Facebook page or linkedin profile?

    • No, not brain-dead, just deceived. Those who come to believe the redefined terms found in false belief systems are brought to those beliefs incrementally; false premises are laid down and then built upon. I’ve watched several HRM teachers work their ‘magic’ on video series. Unless you’re willing to pause every few seconds and check what they’re saying against the Greek/Hebrew, I can see how some can get sucked in.

      There is a facebook page for JGIG – you can click on the link in the left sidebar on this page. I don’t have time for tweeting, so no, not there. I do post on occasion on a forum, though not lately, because the primary HRMers on the board all got banned for bad behavior! One thread from a while back kind of runs the gamut, if you want to take a look: http://www.survivalistboards.com/showthread.php?t=189297

      It’s entertaining and informative =o).

    • To JGIG said, I would like to add, “To the hungry soul, every bitter thing tastes sweet.” The lack of spiritual reality in our churches, wherever they are on the denominational spectrum, causes a profound hunger for deeper things. Such movements as the HRM, and various cults, purport to fulfill that hunger. Their answer is a meal that fills the stomach, having the appearance of godliness, but lacks nutritional value.

  36. Ionowen….just to be clear many of these HRM followers do indeed Love the Lord and want to follow, honor and worship Him. I know this from first hand experience. But no matter how much they desire to try and follow Him they are simply under a veil and cannot see the truth. We don’t call Jews brain dead even though they choose to follow the Law. But I do understand your feelings in how they can miss something so clear in the scriptures. But honestly they probably say the same thing. lol
    I will say however that after having been around a Law Keeper I would not be where I am at today spiritually. This actually opened up a whole new understanding of the scriptures I had never seen before. I can honestly say I see the book of Galatians very differently today than I did just a year and a half ago. I had never seen how so much of the New Covenant is actually Law vs Grace. Now my eyes have been opened.

  37. Bama, I don’t believe I referred to the HRMers as “brain dead” in any post here. I probably have done elsewhere, for it is certainly a soulish reaction I am prone to, regarding them. I’ve talked with enough Jews to believe that most of them are uncomfortable with the essence of their own religion, the essence of the Old Testament, and the disparity between the two. Many are agnostic. In contrast, most of the HRMers I’ve met are zealots, and suffer from a willful lack of reading comprehension.

    My favorite bit of Galatians is the school analogy. If I were Jewish, and now believed in Yeshua as Lord and Savior, I’ve graduated from the School of Torah, and while I still benefit from the lessons I learned there, I’m no longer subject to their dress code, schedule, code of conduct, or obligations to accept, complete and turn in homework. As the gentile that I am, I never went to that school to begin with. But here I am, attending the University of Grace, on a scholarship provided by my adoptive Father, paid for by His Son.

  38. Sorry Lon, I didn’t mean to infer you used that term. It was used by a few others in some earlier posts. I was just using that term as it was used by them, or one of them anyway, to describe the HRMers. I was simply using that to show a comparison between Judaism and those in the HRM. As I suggested most in the HRM movement mean well and really want to please the LORD, they’re just mistaken. Just because one believes in Christ doesn’t mean they will have all the answers.

    I will say though that even among modern Christianity I think Grace, true Grace as Paul taught it, is still very much misunderstood. But that’s another subject! ;)

  39. It would be beneficial, perhaps, to have a post and a thread of comments that explain “Grace.” For instance, I keep finding myself mis-using the word “happiness.” The proper, use of the term isn’t in reference to feeling good, or joyful, or content, or even fulfilled, but rather it is the excellence of doing what you are made to do– like in the Olympics, when you see an ice skater or a gymnast give an excellent performance. That’s happiness, that they are doing a good job at doing what they are made to do. “Grace” is related to that concept, going far beyond the idea of mere “unmerited favor,” yet isn’t a substance like the Catholics claim it is.

    • I think that many confuse Mercy with Grace. For instance -

      Titus 2:11-14
      11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. 12 It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.

      Hebrews 4:16
      16 Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.

      Grace is something that God provides for us as a teacher and a helper . . . interesting stuff!

  40. Grace…Unearned, undeserved, unmerited favor. That is what Christ’s death was to us from God. We didn’t deserve it but He did it for us anyway. Under the Law it was do good, get good, do bad, get bad. Under Law you work for God. Under Grace God works for you. Under Law God said you shall , you shall not….it’s your works. Under Grace God said “I will”

    The “Law” transforms behavior, “Grace” transforms the heart. Under the Old Covenant you were made Righteous because of what YOU did. Under the New Covenant you were made righteous because of what HE did.

    Under Law, if the unclean touch the clean, the clean become unclean.
    Under Grace, if the clean touch the unclean, the unclean become the clean!
    Under Law, sin is contagious.
    Under Grace, Righteousness is contagious!

    Under the Law the blood of the sacrifices covered the sins. In other words once your/their sins were covered God no longer saw those sins. Under Grace/New Covenant Jesus became the sacrificial Lamb. His blood covered our sins….forever. So if a Believer sins the Father does not see your sins. Remember the old Covenant sacrifices were a shadow of Christ.

    Are you “sin” conscious or “Son” conscious? One is a result of “Law” the other a result of “Grace”. One depends on you. The other depends on “Him”. One is “Self-righteous” the other is because you ARE “Righteous”

    Here are a few sites to help with what I consider very good Grace teachers.

    http://escapetoreality.org/

    http://www.charismaministries.org/

    Jgig I found many other sites on Grace after you linked a site from another poster here…SavedByGrace. He has some very good stuff too. http://thegospelofgrace.wordpress.com/about/

    • Hi Bama,

      I agree with most of what you wrote, but would not say that ‘God works for us’, but rather that God has done the Work that we couldn’t possibly do on our behalf – He provided us with His Righteousness because we could not provide for our own through the Law.

      Thanks for the links – I’m familiar with two of them – good stuff. Note to readers – always read with discernment, everywhere, even here =o)!

  41. just to sort a few things out, as torah observant believer in yeshua, i don’t accept the common misconception of old and new covenent. rather, the tanach which comprises the torah, neviim, and the ketuviim, and then instead of giving another name for scholars and denominations to argue about, i regard the writings as the besorat kadoshim, the egrot, and the hitgallut. if someone desperately wants a name assigned to those three clusters of books, i refer to them as the torah, since the torah is the word of adonai, and yeshua is the torah, conceivably, all the writings can be classified as the torah.

    • Michael, you’re welcome to believe whatever you wish, but it is not based on what the Scriptures actually say. You’ve ignored the textual/contextual proof given in the OP.

      As for your assertion that Yeshua is the Torah; no, He is not.

      Colossians 2:9
      9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10 and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority.

      For your statement to be true, one must believe that Torah is God (! Idolatry !) and that Torah is head over every power and authority. Ludicrous. And heresy.

      My prayer is that you would receive a revelation about Who Yeshua really is, what He came to do, what that actually accomplished, and who you can be (are, if you indeed are already in Christ) in Him.

      Grace and peace to you,
      -JGIG

  42. I think those embracing the men that promote law keeping just do not trust in the promises of God. They need to feel that they have done something to deserve salvation, that is above and beyond everyone else (those unworthy folks out there). It is not intentional but just something lacking in themselves that hold them back from appreciating that God loves all mankind. I know, because I spent most of my adult life in the WWCG which was the imaginations of Herbert Armstrong. Usually these churches are started by a man whose inner most purpose is to push themselves forward. They claim that they were especially called by God and therefore deserve the position of the Levitical Priesthood, and the tithe. This of course to spread the Gospel. Those incompliance never ask if the tithe was ever purposed for that task in the OT. Of course they would never ask what was the purpose of it anyway. Well even a cursory read through scriptures would reveal so much….. but men love themselves more than God.

  43. I have to add that…it is an ongoing battle because Religion is a curse to true Christianity. For example in an earlier post, all that you have explained is clearly expressed in the scripture . Col 2:13- says the same thing no matter which translation is used but religion (man’s expression) has so invaded our ability to read or hear and receive God that we can accept nothing more or want nothing more than the explanation that we have been provided.

    • Hi Joy, welcome to JGIG!

      Yes, there is a definite religious spirit out there, and it does create a fog around the plain truths (sorry to borrow a phrase from the WWCG) of the Scriptures. Thank you for your comments here =o).

      Blessings,
      -JGIG

  44. Good Day,

    One very related issue is the following question:

    “There was a cutting of a covenant with the people of Israel in Sinai according to,

    Exo 24:8
    ויקח משׁה את הדם ויזרק על העם ויאמר הנה דם הברית אשׁר כרת יהוה עמכם על כל הדברים האלה

    (LITV) And Moses took the blood and sprinkled on the people, and said, Behold, the blood of the covenant which Jehovah has cut with you concerning these words.

    SO, WHY THERE WAS A NEED TO CUT A COVENANT WITH THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL IN SINAI, WHILE THEY WERE ALREADY INCLUDED AND COVERED BY THE COVENANT BETWEEN G-D AND ABRAHAM?”

    Thanks.

    • The Law was brought in part because the people were grumbling and doubting God. If you read the account of Israel coming out of Egypt, they whined and complained and God still continued to provide for them and bless them.

      He then brought them the Law, saying IF they obeyed, they would be blessed; if they disobeyed they would be cursed. Instead of saying ‘No! Let us stay in Abraham’s Covenant’, a covenant of Grace, they, in their self-righteous, wanting-to-be-in-control pride said, “Everything you have asked, we will do.”

      This from the same people who could not even pick up manna according to instructions . . .

      So God gave them their way – to prove to them their inability to keep Law and their need for Grace.

      God said that the Law was given because of transgressions. The following passage details it nicely:

      Galatians 3:
      15 Brothers and sisters, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.

      19 Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator. 20 A mediator, however, implies more than one party; but God is one.

      21 Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. 22 But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

      23 Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

      26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

      The Scriptures also say that the Law increases sinning:

      Romans 5:20
      20 The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase.

      The Law bears the fruit of death:

      Romans 7:9-13
      9 I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me. 12 Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.

      13 Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful.

      So to answer your question, the need to bring the Law was to show mankind their sin and their need for a Savior.

      -JGIG

  45. The prophecy in Jeremiah says that the new covenant is NOT LIKE the covenant God made with their fathers. What is different about it then? A new high priest who is sinless and eternal, a new offering for sin that is perfect.

    Messiah kept the Passover and said as often as you eat this bread- what bread? the unleavened bread of Passover, do it in remembrance of me! Rome outlawed Gods holydays, and substituted pagan days instead. In Ezekiel people were worshipping the sun and God said he would not forgive them for it. Sun day is from sun worship, moon day is from moon worship so is thor s day and saturn day. God said in the new covenant he will write his law on our hearts, and he says return to me, for I have redeemed you!

    • Hi Ken; welcome to JGIG.

      You wrote, “The prophecy in Jeremiah says that the new covenant is NOT LIKE the covenant God made with their fathers. What is different about it then? A new high priest who is sinless and eternal, a new offering for sin that is perfect.”

      12 For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also. 13 He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. 14 For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests. 15 And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, 16 one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is declared:

      “You are a priest forever,
      in the order of Melchizedek.”

      18 The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless 19 (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God. (from Heb. 7)

      null

      Passover is a remembrance of Israel’s deliverance from Egypt; commemoration of the Last Supper is a remembrance of the Work of Christ – His Body broken for us and His Blood shed for us, providing the gifts of Forgiveness, Righteousness, and New Life in Him. No . . . we’re not to keep the Passover as Israel did, but the New Covenant in His Blood:

      19 And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.”
      20 In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you. (from Luke 22)

      We are not to celebrate the Passover in remembrance of the shadow, but the substance of the Work of Christ. Messiah kept the Old Covenant; He was born under it! Meanwhile, He pointed to the New Covenant, which would be ratified in His own Blood.

      As for what holidays you celebrate or what day you rest/worship on, you should do according to your conscience. There are articles on the Articles Page here at JGIG that address the facts regarding the issues you raise above. In the spirit of Romans 14, one should do as their conscience dictates. I feel free to worship/rest on any day.

      As for what law is written on the heart of the believer, we see these as God’s commands (Law, instructions, Torah) after the Cross:

      23 And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another, just as he has commanded us. 24 Whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him. And by this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit whom he has given us. (from 1 Jn. 3)

      -JGIG

  46. The person that wrote the fancy web page, in desperation to prove his/her point AGAINST the HRM made some important hermeneutical and theological mistakes.

    “At the Last Supper Jesus held up the bread and the wine and said,
    “This is my Body and my blood, do this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:14-20)
    Jesus says in Luke 22:20,
    “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.”
    communion26Jesus wants us to remember that His Flesh and Blood took the place of the old covenant (Law) to make us acceptable (free from sin – from spiritual death to spiritual life) before God.
    It seems to be a rather significant point made during the observance of a feast itself. He shifted the focus in a very clear way from remembering what the Passover was all about to remembering what the breaking of HIS Body and the shedding of HIS Blood was all about . . . replacing the blood on the doorposts (a TEMPORARY solution) with His own Blood (the PERMANENT solution).”

    First of, this was not a “last supper” but a halakhic Passover Seder according to the calendar and ritual of the Essenes. This is why the gospels are in apparent contradiction and the synoptic gospels have Him celebrate the Passover while the gospel of John has him crucified the day before Passover (the Temple Sadducce and Pharisee Passover).

    Next, he/she puts spurious words in the Saviour’s lips by writing that: “Jesus wants us to remember that His Flesh and Blood took the place of the old covenant (Law) to make us acceptable (free from sin – from spiritual death to spiritual life) before God.”

    This is not what it means. He is explaining what the pierced and broken matzah and the cups of wine mean in the liturgy (Seder) of the (Essene) Passover as there was no roasted lamb to eat but He is the True Lamb of God. Furthermore, every covenant requires a sacrifice and the pieces of the slaughter are cut. That is how a covenant is CUT and blood is shed. This is NOT meaning that His Flesh and Blood took the place of the old covenant (Law).” His Blood and Flesh is the fulfilling of the previous animal sacrifice CUT for the people in covenant. The LAW is now written in minds and hearts not written in tablets of stone. The LAW is still the same. It is still SPIRITUAL and it is still PERFECT.

    • If what you say is true, then how do explain the Perfect, Permanent High Priesthood of Christ, clearly of a New Covenant, not of the Old Covenant, since Christ is of the Tribe of Judah and not of the Tribe of Levi?

      Christ cannot legally administer the Old Covenant.

      If you operate in the Old Covenant and fail in any point, you have no high priest to represent you before God.

      Yikes.

      • The priesthood changed from Levitical to Melkisedec. This has nothing to do with the entire Law.

        I do not operate in the Old (sic) covenant. Who told you that? My post doesn’t say that.

        Your understanding of the legal ramifications of what Messiah can legal administer pertaining the Law is incorrect.

        Let me start by explaining that the Father instituted the Levitical Aaronic priesthood as a temporary provision since originally the firstborns were the priests. This is not the chronological firstborn but the firstborn according to the faith. Cain, Abel, Noah, Melkisedec, Abraham, Eliyah, etc. offered sacrifices and they were not of the Levitical tribe.,

        The Royal priesthood blessing timeline
        •Melkisedec is a canaanite King and Priest who blessed Abraham
        –Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.
        –Gen 14:19 And he blessed him, and said, Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:
        –Gen 14:20 And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.
        •God blessed Abraham’s seed after the akedah of Isaac
        –Gen 22:16 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:
        –Gen 22:17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;
        –Gen 22:18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.
        •God blesses Isaac after Abraham dies
        –Gen 25:11 And it came to pass after the death of Abraham, that God blessed his son Isaac; and Isaac dwelt by the well Lahairoi.
        •Essau sells his birthright and loses his blessings to Jacob also
        •Jacob blesses Judah with the Scepter and Ephraim with the Birthright after Reuben defiles himself
        •Following the golden calf worship, the priesthood is taken away from the firstborn & given to Levi-Aaron’s children
        •Yahushua restores the Royal Priesthood for the firstborn

        Even though the temple service was corrupt and the high priests were appointed by Romans, God instituted the “office” of the high priests after the heavenly model
        •The Torah forbade the high priest from rending his robe or he would die Lev 10:6 & Ex 28:32
        •Yet, the Sadducee high priest rend his clothes at the trial of Yahushua Mat_26:65 & Mar_14:63
        •The high priest disqualified himself becoming unfit to officiate thereafter

        At the 9th hour while the Lambs were being slaughtered in the Temple there was an earthquake and the veil of the holy of hollies was rend
        •Here are two references explaining this heavenly allegory of “rending away” signifying the displeasure of the Lord with the earthly priesthood and the earthly temple service. It suggests re possession of the service by the Lord and giving it to David’s seed, Yahushua
        –1Sa 28:17 And the LORD hath done to him, as he spake by me: for the LORD hath rent the kingdom out of thine hand, and given it to thy neighbour, even to David:
        –1Ki 14:8 And rent the kingdom away from the house of David, and gave it thee: and yet thou hast not been as my servant David, who kept my commandments, and who followed me with all his heart, to do that only which was right in mine eyes;

        As a compelling conclusion, Yahushua officiated at His own sacrifice, being also the Temple and the High Priest under what you call the old (sic) covenant as everything promised had to be fulfilled under the Law.

        Note also that the priesthood mantle passed from John the Baptist to the Messiah.

        John the Baptist was the legitimate high priest, in waiting, from the course of Abiah. He was the Savior’s forerunner
        •Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
        •After the course of Abiah which is the eight course (1 Chronicles 24) the next course is the course of Yeshua.
        •1 Chr. 24:7-18 Now the first lot came forth to…..
        •1 Chr.24:10 the eighth to Abijah, 1Ch 24:11 The ninth to ישׁוּע, (Yeshua)

        He dies at the ninth hour, the ninth course and the ninth red heiffer sacrifice. This is all from what you call the old (sic) covenant.

      • None of what you say changes the fact that Jesus is the Perfect, Permanent High Priest of the New Covenant. The New Covenant is not the same as the Old Covenant, as examined in the article on which you’re commenting.

        You can blow as much smoke as you want; the Scriptures are clear: New Priesthood, New Law. Old Covenant out; New Covenant in.

        You wrote, “Cain, Abel, Noah, Melkisedec, Abraham, Eliyah, etc. offered sacrifices and they were not of the Levitical tribe.”

        First of all, many sources say that Elijah was a Levite. Second of all, the other guys were all before Sinai and not subject to Old Covenant Law – the Levitical priesthood had not yet been established as an integral part of the Law.

        So I’m not sure what you think you’re proving with the above comment.

        As for you ‘operating’ in the Old Covenant, your defense of its current relevance led me to believe that you pursued the keeping of the commandments contained therein. My apologies if I’ve erred in that assumption.

        And please, before commenting again, take a gander a the Comments Policy here at JGIG. From here on out, posts over 500 words or full of pontification not related to the OP will not be posted.

        Comments Policy

        You have another comment pending, which will be posted, I just have to scoot for now and will get to it later.

        Grace and peace to you,
        -JGIG

      • Oh! Please! Where did I even put in doubt that Yahushua is the High Priest? On the contrary! I demonstrated how He legally officiated as High Priest in His own sacrifice in His own Altar.in the Temple of His own body What Yahushua did was magnify the Torah and make it honourable fulfilling the prophesy He didn’t come to abolish the LAw.

        Isa_42:21 The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness’ sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.

        It wasn’t that the Law was bad but the standard of compliance aka the benchmark of Pharisees was fundamentally flawed

        the Law is the “what” but the means or the “how” is through undeserved Grace. The Law is the eternal stipulation and the instructions, while the Law observance’s standard of compliance is Yahushua and the means to reach this lofty standard or benchmark is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. So it is not that the Law is thrown away but that only through Yahushua we might fulfill the Law observance according to the benchmark who is Yahushua. The Holy spirit reproduces the character of Yahushua so that we may observe the Law in the manner that is pleasing and acceptable to the Father.

      • RO RI wrote, “Oh! Please! Where did I even put in doubt that Yahushua is the High Priest? On the contrary! I demonstrated how He legally officiated as High Priest in His own sacrifice in His own Altar.in the Temple of His own body What Yahushua did was magnify the Torah and make it honourable fulfilling the prophesy He didn’t come to abolish the LAw.”

        19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. (from Luke 22)

        11 Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? 12 For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well. 13 For the one of whom these things are spoken belonged to another tribe, from which no one has ever served at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, and in connection with that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.

        15 This becomes even more evident when another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek, 16 who has become a priest, not on the basis of a legal requirement concerning bodily descent, but by the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is witnessed of him,

        “You are a priest forever,
        after the order of Melchizedek.”

        18 For on the one hand, a former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness 19 (for the law made nothing perfect); but on the other hand, a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God.

        20 And it was not without an oath. For those who formerly became priests were made such without an oath, 21 but this one was made a priest with an oath by the one who said to him:

        “The Lord has sworn
        and will not change his mind,
        ‘You are a priest forever.’”

        22 This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant. (from Hebrews 7)

        4 Now if he were on earth, he would not be a priest at all, since there are priests who offer gifts according to the law. 5 They serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things. For when Moses was about to erect the tent, he was instructed by God, saying, “See that you make everything according to the pattern that was shown you on the mountain.” 6 But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. 7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.

        13 In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (from Hebrews 8)

        11 But when Christ came as high priest of the good things that are now already here, he went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not made with human hands, that is to say, is not a part of this creation. 12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, thus obtaining eternal redemption. 13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!

        15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.

        16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, 17 because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living. 18 This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood. 19 When Moses had proclaimed every command of the law to all the people, he took the blood of calves, together with water, scarlet wool and branches of hyssop, and sprinkled the scroll and all the people. 20 He said, “This is the blood of the covenant, which God has commanded you to keep.” 21 In the same way, he sprinkled with the blood both the tabernacle and everything used in its ceremonies. 22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

        23 It was necessary, then, for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. 25 Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. 26 Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, 28 so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him. (From Hebrews 9)

        For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. 2 Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? 3 But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.

        5 Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said,

        “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired,
        but a body have you prepared for me;

        6 in burnt offerings and sin offerings
        you have taken no pleasure.

        7 Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God,
        as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’”

        8 When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), 9 then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.” He does away with the first in order to establish the second. 10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

        11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

        15 And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying,

        16 “This is the covenant that I will make with them
        after those days, declares the Lord:
        I will put my laws on their hearts,
        and write them on their minds,”

        17 then he adds,

        “I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.”

        18 Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin.

        19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, 20 by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful. (from Hebrews 10)

        —–> It’s clear that Christ offered Himself to satisfy the requirements of the Old Covenant, and with the shedding of His Blood, ratified and became the Perfect, Permanent High Priest of the New Covenant. The Old is not coming back. Ever. It has been satisfied (fulfilled) and set aside.

        Did Christ magnify the Law? You bet. He preached it as God gave it, preaching not only the commandments to the flesh of man, but also to man’s soul and spirit. Do not murder was magnified to don’t even hate. Do not commit adultery was magnified to don’t even lust. Jesus was identifying that sin begins in the heart, revealing the true condition of the human heart and its need for redemption. He upped the ante on the Law: It’s not just what we do or don’t do, but our innermost thoughts and heart motives that God judges. A Law that was not being kept in its watered-down state of the times became even more impossible to keep, pointing mankind to Christ, to Grace. That’s the Law’s job:

        23 Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24 So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. (from Gal. 3)

        You wrote, “The Holy spirit reproduces the character of Yahushua so that we may observe the Law in the manner that is pleasing and acceptable to the Father.”

        Scripture supports the notion that the Holy Spirit works in us to reflect the character of Christ, but Scripture does not support the notion that the Holy Spirit enables us to observe the Law:

        16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. (from Gal. 5)

        Indeed, in Christ, we have actually died to the Law, being severed eternally from it. Not only that, but we MUST be, so that we can serve in the new way of the Spirit, so that we can (are able to) bear fruit unto God:

        4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we are released from the law, having died 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. (from Rom. 7)

        19 “For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” (from Gal. 2)

        These are foundational truths and spell out what is pleasing to the Father. It is not our observance of Law which is pleasing to Him, but being in Christ which is pleasing to Him. As we rest in the truths of Who Christ is and who we are IN Him, Fruit is produced in our lives by the Holy Spirit, which we bear. The Scriptures actually tell us that for that to happen, we must be dead to the Law.

  47. The same person goes on to write more heresy here: “God does not require that we follow Torah. He nailed the written code to the cross. (Colossians 2:13-15) He released us from the Law when He released us from our sin through the Blood of Christ. (Romans 7:4-6)”

    The Father’s commandments and the Son’s commandments are one and the same:
    Joh_15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.

    Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

    Let the scripture explain the scripture:

    Psa_51:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet came unto him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba.

    Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.
    Psa_51:9 Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities.

    The blotting out is the sins or transgressions not the blotting of the LAW (Torah) that would be ridiculous and make Yahushua the minister of sin

    Gal_2:17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

    He released us from the LAW of SIN and DEATH but not from following His own instructions to live a Holy Life for the commandments is Holy

    Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

    Rom 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

    • Let the Scripture explain the Scripture:

      4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we are released from the law, having died 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. (from Rom. 7)

      19 “For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” (from Gal. 2)

      18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. (2 Cor. 5:18-19)

      So we see that in Christ we have died to the Law and that God, in Christ, is no longer holding our sins against us.

      To go back to the Law is to go dipping back into the grave to be joined again to the Law.

      Yuck. Spiritually adulterous, as well.

      You can read about that here: Romans 7:1-6 and Spiritual Adultery

  48. Peter forewarned that Paul writes about subjects that are difficult to understand which the unlearned and unstable twist for their own destruction 2 Peter 3:15-17

    We should take what Peter writes seriously. Paul is not a schizophrenic who would state his upholding of the Law and then write Romans rejecting it as something bad or obsolete. If there seems to be a contradiction we should reject improvised conclusions and rightly divide the word of truth.

    Paul’s words are recorded in Act_25:8 While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all.

    What Paul is saying in Romans (and Galatians) and elsewhere is that the Law is the “what” but the means or the “how” is through undeserved Grace. The Law is the eternal stipulation and the instructions, while the Law observance’s standard of compliance is Yahushua and the means to reach this lofty standard or benchmark is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. So it is not that the Law is thrown away but that only through Yahushua we might fulfill the Law observance according to the benchmark who is Yahushua. The Holy spirit reproduces the character of Yahushua so that we may observe the Law in the manner that is pleasing and acceptable to the Father.

    • Paul is only misunderstood if one tries to view what he teaches through the lenses of the Law. If you take what he says as he writes it, he makes perfect sense. And here’s the thing: Paul makes sure we’re viewing everything through the lens of the finished Work of Christ. If you don’t do that, Paul IS difficult to understand!

      And Paul wasn’t against the Law; he was for the proper use of the Law:

      8 We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.

      12 I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who has given me strength, that he considered me trustworthy, appointing me to his service. 13 Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief. 14 The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus.

      15 Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst. 16 But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his immense patience as an example for those who would believe in him and receive eternal life. 17 Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

      18 Timothy, my son, I am giving you this command in keeping with the prophecies once made about you, so that by recalling them you may fight the battle well, 19 holding on to faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and so have suffered shipwreck with regard to the faith.

      Here’s a question for you: If you are in Christ, are you righteous or unrighteous? (Hint: See Rom. 5:17 and 2 Cor. 5:18-19)

      You wrote, “The Law is the eternal stipulation and the instructions, while the Law observance’s standard of compliance is Yahushua and the means to reach this lofty standard or benchmark is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. So it is not that the Law is thrown away but that only through Yahushua we might fulfill the Law observance according to the benchmark who is Yahushua. The Holy spirit reproduces the character of Yahushua so that we may observe the Law in the manner that is pleasing and acceptable to the Father.”

      Um, no. You have NO Scripture to back up those statements. In fact,

      18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. (from Gal. 5)

  49. You are withholding approval to several replies from me that addresses all of your objections particularly your misreading of Hebrews 7:12. This form of censorship is dishonest. So I won’t be replying to you anymore. Shalom

    • Um, not true, RO RI. You have ONE (1) comment still in moderation, which you submitted yesterday morning, which I will get to when I can. I’m a homeschooling mom of seven and it’s the beginning of a school year and an unusually busy weekend. I’ve taken a day or two to respond to your other comments, which you didn’t have a problem with, but now you’ve posted that I’m ‘withholding approval’ of ONE of your comments after 22 hours and labeling it ‘dishonest censorship’? Really?

      Not only that, but after advising you to read the comments policy, I see that your pending comment exceeds the 500-word limit by 675 words! AND it repeats stuff you’ve put in other comments on other posts here at JGIG.

      Tell you what, since you’ve decided to not reply here anymore anyway, how about I save us both some time and just not bother approving or replying to your twisted interpretation of the Letter to the Hebrews.

      Good grief . . .

      Grace and peace to you as you go, RO RI. I do sincerely mean that, but don’t play those games here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 248 other followers

%d bloggers like this: