Why was the Priesthood Changed?

[JLB777]

It is written;

Heb. 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. 13 For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

In Hebrews 7-10 the Spirit of the Christ is telling us about a Priesthood, given exclusively to the Levites, that the Christ replaced with Himself.

In the verses above, it tells about the implications of such an event. According to Moses, God separated Levi, unto Himself, from the rest of the Tribes of Israel, and made a Covenant with them on Israel's behalf. According to this Covenant, given on Mt. Sinai, Aaron and his sons were to be the exclusive "ministers" whose duty it was to administer God's Laws, and to Provide for the atonement of men who had transgressed God's Laws.

In Jer. 31, the Word of God which became Flesh, promised a time "after those days" when HE would take over the Administration of God's Laws, and provide for the atonement of men who transgressed God's Laws Himself.

I have heard religious men, who call Jesus Lord, Lord, teach that the Christ replaced the Priesthood because the Children of Israel rebelled against God's Laws.

I know this is a popular teaching of the religions of the land, but, in my view, the Scriptures point to a different reason for the "Change of the Priesthood. The short version of what I see as God explaining why the Priesthood changed follows.

Matt. 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

I asked God "Why was Israel lost"? And God provided me the answer to my question.

Jer. 50:6 My people hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have caused them to go astray, they have turned them away on the mountains: they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their restingplace.

And again;

Ez. 34:2 Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks?

8 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock;

So what does God promise to do?

11For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I, even I, will both search my sheep, and seek them out.

12 As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out my sheep, and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day.

So then, is this really why Israel went astray? Because the Shepherds God placed over them turned away from God?

Listen to the Christ, The Word of God which became Flesh, tell us about His Covenant with Levi.

Mal. 2:4 And ye shall know that I have sent this commandment unto you, that my covenant might be with Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.

5 My covenant was with him of life and peace; and I gave them to him for the fear wherewith he feared me, and was afraid before my name. (EX. 32)

6 The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity.

7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, (Like Jesus) and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

8 But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.

9 Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.

So what did the Christ do? Did HE not promise a New Covenant in which HE will administer God's Laws, not the Levite. And didn't HE Promise to atone for men who had transgressed God's Commandments, not the "deeds" of the sacrificial Law given to Levi?

Heb. 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

8 For finding fault with them, (The Shepherds which led Israel Astray) he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

So isn't the New Covenant, according to the Christ Himself, the New Priesthood?

What are your thoughts.

Because the law has changed.


We are no longer under the law of Moses.


The Church is under the law of Christ, as He is the Mediator of the New Covenant.



Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. Galatians 6:2





JLB

 

[Studyman]

Because the law has changed.


We are no longer under the law of Moses.


The Church is under the law of Christ, as He is the Mediator of the New Covenant.



Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. Galatians 6:2





JLB

For me, it's about what is actually written, especially given the warnings of the Christ of the Bible regarding "many" deceivers who come in Christ's Name. For instance, in God's promise of a New Covenant, there is nowhere that HE mentions or even implies that His Laws are abolished or removed in the New Covenant. It's the exact opposite if you actually read what He said. Yes, there are "many" who come in Christ's Name that preach they are abolished, and they have convinced "many" of the same thing. But the God who created His New Covenant, should be the one, in my view, to define it. And His People will listen to HIM, and not the "other voice" in the Garden. I hope you might consider questioning and "Testing" the spirits of those "many" voices in this world God placed us in, that the Jesus of the Bible warned about.

Regarding the place in the New Testament that says the "LAW" Changed, I will post what is actually written, and am free and eager to discuss this with you as well, if you are interested.

Heb. 7: 5 And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive "the office of the priesthood", have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

6 But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.

So who received Tithes of Abraham? Levite Priests? Or Melchizedek?

11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

12 For the "priesthood being changed", there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

So then, what was the change? The 10 Commandments God gave Moses, abolished? Love the Lord your God with all your might, anothe Law God gave Moses? Love your neighbor as yourself, another Law God gave Moses, and "ALL" that hangs on these two Greatest Commandments that God gave Moses?

Why don't we continue reading and let the Hebrews author tell us exactly what LAW was changed.

13 For he of whom these things are spoken (Jesus, of the Bible) pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

So then, doesn't the Bible explain exactly what LAW was affected, which was the LAW regarding who could receive the Priesthood? And given the Christ was from the tribe of Judah, and not Levi, it facilitated by necessity, as change in the LAW regarding who could become God's Priest.

Was this "Change" not prophesied about in the Law and Prophets? "The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek."

Micah 5: 2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

Didn't the Faithful know of, and were waiting for this same Christ's arrival?

Luke 1: 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; (From the Tribe of Judah)

It's a fascinating study and there are lots more scriptures foretelling of the coming New Priesthood Covenant, brought about because Levi corrupted the Priesthood Covenant God gave him. (Mal. 2)

Regarding your statement, "we are no longer under the Law of Moses". Wasn't it only those who rejected God's Law that were "under the law"? And didn't Jesus say to "Repent" from rejecting God's Law, and if we did, HE would erase the sins we committed? But if I continue to reject God's Laws, do I not bring myself back under the law, that being dead in which I was held? Consider what Paul actually teaches here.

Rom. 6: 15 What then? shall we sin, (Transgress God's Law) because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. That means NO!, Yes? Why would Paul say this?

16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Yes, there are "many" who come in Christ's name who teach that Jesus came to destroy God's Laws and replace them with His Own.

But the Jesus of the Bible, said not to Even "THINK" such a thing.

Matt. 5: 17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Something to think about.

 

[JLB777]

there is nowhere that HE mentions or even implies that His Laws are abolished or removed in the New Covenant.

For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace. Ephesians 2:14-15


The law of Moses was the enmity between Jew and Gentile; the wall of separation.

• having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances…

Extremely plain words!

• Abolished in His flesh the law of commandments.

Surely you understand the law of Moses with animal sacrifices, food laws, ceremonial washings, Levitical Priesthood, Temple worship, clothing laws, feast days, Sabbath laws were always temporary and pointed to Christ.







JLB

 

[Studyman]

For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace. Ephesians 2:14-15
The law of Moses was the enmity between Jew and Gentile; the wall of separation.

My friend, that is a popular religious philosophy promoted by "Many" who come in Christ's name.

But what I advocate for, is the belief in what is actually written.

Can you find in the Law and Prophets where God placed a WALL of Separation which separated men according to the DNA they were born with?

Here, I know you ignored every Scripture I posted, and refused to even acknowledge them in this reply, so I don't know if you are a believer of Scriptures or not. But in case you are, please consider what the Law and Prophets actually say about Jews and non-Jews.

Ex. 12: 49 One law shall be to him that is homeborn, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among you.

There is no "Wall of Separation" created by God there.

Lev. 19: 34 But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

We are all strangers at one point, Yes? There is no "Wall of Separation" between Jews and non-Jews here.

Is. 56: 6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; 7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people.

There is no "Wall of Separation" here? So where is this wall of separation you are preaching to the world that God placed between repentant Jews and repentant non-Jews? Please show me God's Commandment given to Moses, that created the wall of separation. And if you can't, then why are you preaching that God did?

• having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances…

Extremely plain words!

• Abolished in His flesh the law of commandments.

So given there isn't any of God's Commandments given to Moses, that teaches men to build a "Wall of Separation" between faithful Gentiles like Rehab, and faithful Jews like Zacharias in Luke, who was it then that created the Commandments contained in ordinances?

To answer this question we should seek the Words of the Jesus "of the Bible". I'll refer to His rebuke of the Priests in charge of the Temple in that time.

Mark 7: 6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

So the Pharisees, who were in charge of the Temple, rejected God's Commandments given to Moses, and created their own Commandments. At least according to the Jesus "of the Bible".

What does Paul actually say in Eph. 2?

11 Wherefore remember, that ye (Repentant Gentiles who Jesus quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;) being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;

So isn't Paul saying here that the repentant Gentiles "in the flesh" (Non-Jews according to DNA) were called "Uncircumcised" by the Pharisees? That is who the "Circumcision" (made by hands) was, the Pharisees, Yes?

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

When did God every create a Commandment and gave it to Moses, that taught repentant non-Jews, according to the flesh, were without hope and without God? In fact, I posted the Words of your own Bible which expose that God actually taught the exact opposite.

So just these few Bible facts expose the popular religious philosophy that GOD's "commandments contained in ordnances" created the "Wall of Separation" in the Temple of God, as a deception, a falsehood that Jesus warned about several times. The "Wall of Separation" that had been created for centuries, was created by religious men in charge of the Temple, who taught for Doctrines the commandments of men, not God's Laws given to Moses.

Just as the Holy scriptures exposed the popular religious philosophy that God changed all of the Laws God gave to Moses, when the Prophesied New Priest came and dwelled among men, as false and a deception.

Now you have the same choice as those who Jesus taught in the Gospels. Do you adhere and preserve the religious philosophies taught to us by the religions of this world we were born into? Or do you listen to and believe the God of the bible and the Prophets and His Son that HE sent to show His Truth?

Surely you understand the law of Moses with animal sacrifices, food laws, ceremonial washings, Levitical Priesthood, Temple worship, clothing laws, feast days, Sabbath laws were always temporary and pointed to Christ.

I know you are wrong Biblically, regarding what Law the Hebrews author taught that Changed. I posted the evidence, not my words, but the inspired Word of the Holy Scriptures, and you didn't even acknowledge them.

And I know you are wrong about who created the Commandments contained in ordinances that caused a Wall of Separation between repent Jews and repentant Non-Jews. I posted the evidence, not with my words, but the Inspired Word of the Holy Scriptures.

I am hoping that you might reconsider the religious philosophies you have adopted and are now promoting and humble yourself to the Inspired Words of the Lord's Christ, and His Father who sent Him.

When we come to terms which what the scriptures actually teach about the two issues above, then by all means, let's allow the Scriptures to direct us in all modern religious doctrines and traditions. As Paul advocates for.

2 Tim. 3: 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[JLB777]

My friend, that is a popular religious philosophy promoted by "Many" who come in Christ's name.

Quoting scripture is popular among those who follow Christ.

 

[ralliann]

For me, it's about what is actually written, especially given the warnings of the Christ of the Bible regarding "many" deceivers who come in Christ's Name. For instance, in God's promise of a New Covenant, there is nowhere that HE mentions or even implies that His Laws are abolished or removed in the New Covenant. It's the exact opposite if you actually read what He said. Yes, there are "many" who come in Christ's Name that preach they are abolished, and they have convinced "many" of the same thing. But the God who created His New Covenant, should be the one, in my view, to define it. And His People will listen to HIM, and not the "other voice" in the Garden. I hope you might consider questioning and "Testing" the spirits of those "many" voices in this world God placed us in, that the Jesus of the Bible warned about.

Regarding the place in the New Testament that says the "LAW" Changed, I will post what is actually written, and am free and eager to discuss this with you as well, if you are interested.

Heb. 7: 5 And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive "the office of the priesthood", have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:

6 But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.

So who received Tithes of Abraham? Levite Priests? Or Melchizedek?

11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

12 For the "priesthood being changed", there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

So then, what was the change? The 10 Commandments God gave Moses, abolished? Love the Lord your God with all your might, anothe Law God gave Moses? Love your neighbor as yourself, another Law God gave Moses, and "ALL" that hangs on these two Greatest Commandments that God gave Moses?

Why don't we continue reading and let the Hebrews author tell us exactly what LAW was changed.

13 For he of whom these things are spoken (Jesus, of the Bible) pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

So then, doesn't the Bible explain exactly what LAW was affected, which was the LAW regarding who could receive the Priesthood? And given the Christ was from the tribe of Judah, and not Levi, it facilitated by necessity, as change in the LAW regarding who could become God's Priest.

Was this "Change" not prophesied about in the Law and Prophets? "The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek."

Micah 5: 2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

Didn't the Faithful know of, and were waiting for this same Christ's arrival?

Luke 1: 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, 68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, 69 And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; (From the Tribe of Judah)

It's a fascinating study and there are lots more scriptures foretelling of the coming New Priesthood Covenant, brought about because Levi corrupted the Priesthood Covenant God gave him. (Mal. 2)

Regarding your statement, "we are no longer under the Law of Moses". Wasn't it only those who rejected God's Law that were "under the law"? And didn't Jesus say to "Repent" from rejecting God's Law, and if we did, HE would erase the sins we committed? But if I continue to reject God's Laws, do I not bring myself back under the law, that being dead in which I was held? Consider what Paul actually teaches here.

Rom. 6: 15 What then? shall we sin, (Transgress God's Law) because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. That means NO!, Yes? Why would Paul say this?

16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Yes, there are "many" who come in Christ's name who teach that Jesus came to destroy God's Laws and replace them with His Own.

But the Jesus of the Bible, said not to Even "THINK" such a thing.

Matt. 5: 17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Something to think about.

Law and commandments. Covenants too.
God created the Levitical priesthood, by the hand of Moses.

 

[Studyman]

Law and commandments. Covenants too.
God created the Levitical priesthood, by the hand of Moses.

Yes, it was a Covenant "Added" because of Transgressions, after Israel broke the Covenant God gave them in the day He led them out of Egypt.

Jer. 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:

23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you.

 

[ralliann]

Yes, it was a Covenant "Added" because of Transgressions, after Israel broke the Covenant God gave them in the day He led them out of Egypt.

It was law that was added.

Jer. 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:

23 But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you.

Jer 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

 

[Dan Perez]

It was law that was added.

Jer 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

This is what I see .

#1 The OLD COVENANT with all its LAW all ABOLISHED as written in Eph 2:14 and 15 and 2 Cor 3:13-14 .

In EZE 36:27 , when Israel is saved , they will GIVEN a new HEART and cause you to WALK in my STATUTES and my JUGEMENTS .

The only verse that says Israel will have a new HEART , and cause you TO WALK IN MY STATUTES .

dan p

 

[Hawkins]

Abraham is about faith, while Moses is about Law. In a bigger picture,

Adam and Eve (first lineage of humans) fell due to lack of 1) obedience and 2) faith in God and His Word.

Law is a measurement of obedience. The Judgment of Law will be carried out objectively on one's behavior in past. Law deals objectively, that is under valid witnessing, but only 1) the past, and 2) one's behavior. Humans as a whole, due mainly to the influence from the fallen angels (i.e., the effect from the snake to Adam and Eve) failed the test. As a result, no human can enter the Final Heaven (i.e., New Heaven and New Earth) by means of the Judgment of Law which is an evaluation of one's obedience. Either humans as a whole shall be destroyed by a flood, or God needs to provide an alternative to redeem humankind. Needless to say, through the self-sacrifice of Jesus Christ at a certain point of humanity, a series of Covenants are granted by God for the salvation of humankind.

Ultimately, the New Covenant is a measurement of one's faith. Both obedience and faith are the fundamental elements for entities to live in an eternity with a sin-incompatible God. Humans failed the test of obedience while the New Covenant is a test of faith. The purpose is to identify those who can live with such a sin-incompatible God in eternity. That is, it serves as an open standard for the identifying of the righteous/God's sheep/God's Elect.


Faith cannot be judged objectively the same as in the case of Law. The Judgment of Covenant is a subjective judgment from a fair and just God who is Jesus Christ. Only God can judge heart and faith precisely and justly, while the judgment is not limited to one's behavior and one's past.

Law (Mosaic) is said to be abolished, as Law and Prophets are proclaimed up to the point of John the Baptist. It means gentiles are unrelated to the Mosaic covenant. Jews and gentiles are reconciled through Jesus with His New Covenant (or New Law) which is tied to the Judgment of Covenant and is about faith.

Ephesians 2:15-16
He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace, and might reconcile both groups to God in one body through the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through it.

To the Jews then, the Levi priesthood is for the Mosaic Law came with the Mosaic Covenant. The priesthood ranking of Melchizedek represents a Covenant of Faith. The Jews are more comfortable to explain it as a Law change, but in fact it refers to a Covenant change. Ultimately the difference lies in the nature of the Final Judgment. It is to distinguish between a Judgment of Law, and the Judgment of Covenant. Both are carried out lawfully and legitimately.

 

[Valletta]

Abraham is about faith, while Moses is about Law. In a bigger picture,




Law (Mosaic) is said to be abolished, as Law and Prophets are proclaimed up to the point of John the Baptist. It means gentiles are unrelated to the Mosaic covenant. Jews and gentiles are reconciled through Jesus with His New Covenant (or New Law) which is tied to the Judgment of Covenant and is about faith.

Ephesians 2:15-16
He has abolished the law with its commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new humanity in place of the two, thus making peace, and might reconcile both groups to God in one body through the cross, thus putting to death that hostility through it.

To the Jews then, the Levi priesthood is for the Mosaic Law came with the Mosaic Covenant. The priesthood ranking of Melchizedek represents a Covenant of Faith. The Jews are more comfortable to explain it as a Law change, but in fact it refers to a Covenant change. Ultimately the difference lies in the nature of the Final Judgment. It is to distinguish between a Judgment of Law, and the Judgment of Covenant. Both are carried out lawfully and legitimately.

The priesthood of Melchizedek offered mere bread and wine. Our New Covenant is Jesus, His true flesh and blood, under the appearance of bread and wine.

 

[Carl Emerson]

The priesthood of Melchizedek offered mere bread and wine. Our New Covenant is Jesus, His true flesh and blood, under the appearance of bread and wine.

There is nothing 'mere' about the order of Melchizedek - That is the Priestly Order that was with God before creation in which Jesus is high priest.

 

[Valletta]

There is nothing 'mere' about the order of Melchizedek - That is the Priestly Order that was with God before creation in which Jesus is high priest.

There is a huge difference between mere bread and wine and the Body and Blood of Our Lord. No offense intended to Melchizedek.

 

[Carl Emerson]

There is a huge difference between mere bread and wine and the Body and Blood of Our Lord. No offense intended to Melchizedek.

Maybe it was more than that given that the Cross was timeless event anchored in History...

 

[eleos1954]

This is what I see .

#1 The OLD COVENANT with all its LAW all ABOLISHED as written in Eph 2:14 and 15 and 2 Cor 3:13-14 .

In EZE 36:27 , when Israel is saved , they will GIVEN a new HEART and cause you to WALK in my STATUTES and my JUGEMENTS .

The only verse that says Israel will have a new HEART , and cause you TO WALK IN MY STATUTES .

dan p

The law was not ... is not abolished .... when we are in Christ we are judged by the law ... but are not condemned by it.

Eze 36:27 ..... judgements ..... judgement requires law.

Statutes - a written law.

God's law is alive and well.

 

[Carl Emerson]

The law was not ... is not abolished .... when we are in Christ we are judged by the law ... but are not condemned by it.

Eze 36:27 ..... judgements ..... judgement requires law.

Statutes - a written law.

God's law is alive and well.

How then do you account for Jesus saying this in Mathew 12 ???

1At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat them. 2When the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath.”

3Jesus replied, “Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 4He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for them to eat, but only for the priests.

5Or haven’t you read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and yet are innocent? 6But I tell you that something greater than the temple is here.

7If only you had known the meaning of ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. 8For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”

Jesus Heals on the Sabbath
(Mark 3:1–6; Luke 6:6–11)

9Moving on from there, Jesus entered their synagogue, 10and a man with a withered hand was there. In order to accuse Jesus, they asked Him, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?”

11He replied, “If one of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it and lift it out? 12How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.”

13Then Jesus said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” So he stretched it out, and it was restored to full use, just like the other. 14But the Pharisees went out and plotted how they might kill Jesus.

 

[eleos1954]

How then do you account for Jesus saying this in Mathew 12 ???

1At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat them. 2When the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath.”

3Jesus replied, “Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 4He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for them to eat, but only for the priests.

5Or haven’t you read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and yet are innocent? 6But I tell you that something greater than the temple is here.

7If only you had known the meaning of ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. 8For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”

Jesus Heals on the Sabbath
(Mark 3:1–6; Luke 6:6–11)

9Moving on from there, Jesus entered their synagogue, 10and a man with a withered hand was there. In order to accuse Jesus, they asked Him, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?”

11He replied, “If one of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it and lift it out? 12How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.”

13Then Jesus said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” So he stretched it out, and it was restored to full use, just like the other. 14But the Pharisees went out and plotted how they might kill Jesus.

It is not unlawful to eat food on the Sabbath (it would be to harvest) ..... it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath (ie in this example healing)

Priests had duties that were required for them to do ... Priests are permitted to "work" as they serve in the temple on the Sabbath.

The clergy of the day were in error about what was "works" on the Sabbath and Jesus pointed this out to them.

 

[Carl Emerson]

It is not unlawful to eat food on the Sabbath (it would be to harvest) ..... it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath (ie in this example healing)

Priests had duties that were required for them to do ... Priests are permitted to "work" as they serve in the temple on the Sabbath.

The clergy of the day were in error about what was "works" on the Sabbath and Jesus pointed this out to them.

Your interpretation does not seem to align with the text.

They did not just eat, they picked and ate.

They were technically breaking the sabbath.

Likewise David and his companions technically broke that Sabbath.

So Jesus was saying that His actions complied with a Law greater than the Sabbath.

 

[eleos1954]

Your interpretation does not seem to align with the text.

They did not just eat, they picked and ate.

They were technically breaking the sabbath.

Likewise David and his companions technically broke that Sabbath.

So Jesus was saying that His actions complied with a Law greater than the Sabbath.

They were not breaking the Sabbath .... it is not wrong to eat on the Sabbath.

It does not say this ...

So Jesus was saying that His actions complied with a Law greater than the Sabbath.

The clergy of the day accused Him of breaking laws concerning the Sabbath on multiple occasions, but Jesus didn't break an Old Testament command.

The clergy of the day had made up all kinds of things (themselves) of what they considered breaking the Sabbath and had made the Sabbath a burden ... rather than a delight. The Pharisees had misinterpreted the scriptures regarding the Sabbath and Jesus was letting them know of their error.

David is addressed here (by Jesus) and he did not break the Sabbath

Mark 2:23-28 – The Sabbath Was Made for Man​

23 One Sabbath he was going through the grainfields, and as they made their way, his disciples began to pluck heads of grain. 24 And the Pharisees were saying to him, “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” 25 And he (Jesus) said to them, “Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry, he and those who were with him: 26 how he entered the house of God, in the time of[a] Abiathar the high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with him?” 27 And he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath.”

Eating and/or feeding others is not breaking the Sabbath ... it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.

Jesus brought up the story of David as an example of not breaking the Sabbath .... not the other way around ... else it would have shown the Pharisees as being right. On the contrary Jesus was correcting them.

Your interpretation does not seem to align with the text.

They did not just eat, they picked and ate.

They were technically breaking the sabbath.

Likewise David and his companions technically broke that Sabbath.

So Jesus was saying that His actions complied with a Law greater than the Sabbath.

They were technically breaking the sabbath.

This is the same mindset the Pharisees had .... lol Technically according to what? According to additional requirements they had added themselves (many) and by doing so had made the Sabbath a burden instead of a delight.

Likewise David and his companions technically broke that Sabbath.

Jesus used this very story as an example to let them know David did not break the Sabbath either .... if used otherwise then it would have proven the Pharisees as being correct in their interpretation ... Jesus used the story to point out their error.

Matthew 12:3-8 Jesus answered, “Have you not read what David did when he and the people with him were hungry? He went into God's house, and he and those with him ate the holy bread, which was lawful only for priests to eat.

Both stories are about hunger and necessity of food ....

Works of mercy and of necessity are no transgression of the Sabbath law. God does not condemn these things.

It is not unlawful to eat on the Sabbath. It is not unlawful to be merciful on the Sabbath.

The Sabbath is to be a delight ... not burdened with "man made technicalities" .... mercy and necessity and the works thereof are perfect-ally acceptable and Jesus was bringing across that point in both of these stories.

 

[Dan Perez]

The law was not ... is not abolished .... when we are in Christ we are judged by the law ... but are not condemned by it.

Eze 36:27 ..... judgements ..... judgement requires law.

Statutes - a written law.

God's law is alive and well.

And how are people saved under the OLD COVENANT ?

Or we under the NEW COVENANT ,and is it in operation today ?

Your thoughts and would like a verse also ?

dan p