Who is Israel?

[Guojing]

Yep, they're called Christians.

-CryptoLutheran

At the end of the day, you interpret the "know the Lord" in Hebrews 8:11 in a very broad manner, hence you came to the conclusion that every Christian fulfills that today.

We can agree to disagree on the meaning of "know" and move on.

 

[JEBofChristTheLord]

Greek does not work like English. The same Greek word, in this case "diathḗkē" can have different meanings, depending on the rest of the words surrounding it.

That is why the KJV translators took care to use covenant in some cases, and testament in others. Hebrews 8-9 is a good example of the different English translation.

But I note that you did not answer the question: How are you arriving at a distinction?

 

[ViaCrucis]

At the end of the day, you interpret the "know the Lord" in Hebrews 8:11 in a very broad manner, hence you came to the conclusion that every Christian fulfills that today.

We can agree to disagree on the meaning of "know" and move on.

I define it the way the Bible does. The way that Christians have understood it for the last two thousand years.

You are free to believe whatever you want. But you continue to demonstrate basic illiteracy of Scripture and Christian doctrine.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Did you even read Hebrews 8:8-13 properly? It is in the future tense, not past.

For finding fault with them, 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:

13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

It was future tense when the Prophet Jeremiah wrote what he wrote. It was fulfilled by Christ, which is what Hebrews says.

Yeah, with the New Covenant the Old is made obsolete. That's happened.

If you are going to refuse to use basic reading comprehension then this is going to get sillier and sillier.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Guojing]

It was future tense when the Prophet Jeremiah wrote what he wrote. It was fulfilled by Christ, which is what Hebrews says.

Yeah, with the New Covenant the Old is made obsolete. That's happened.

If you are going to refuse to use basic reading comprehension then this is going to get sillier and sillier.

-CryptoLutheran

You presented zero scripture indicating the New Covenant in any past tense.

 

[Guojing]

But I note that you did not answer the question: How are you arriving at a distinction?

You do not know the difference in meaning between the 2 English words, testament and covenant?

Let me know if you don't and I will explain the difference.

 

[ViaCrucis]

You presented zero scripture indicating the New Covenant in any past tense.

You mean other than Hebrews 8 which says that Jesus is the Mediator of a new and better Covenant which has rendered the old obsolete?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[The Liturgist]

You presented zero scripture indicating the New Covenant in any past tense.

We could literally just post the Nicene Creed, which I would assume / hope you agree with, since for our belief in the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come to be meaningful, the New Covenant must presently be in effect.

And likewise, for our believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, which Evangelicals interpret to refer to the Invisible Church of all Believers, and Roman Catholics to the Roman Catholic Church, and Anglicans and Old Catholics and Assyrians and Lutherans and Baptists and Congregationalists interpret according to their beliefs, but however one interprets this phrase, a belief in this church is meaningless, as is a belief in the Holy Spirit as the Lord, the Giver of Life, who Spake by the Prophets, if we regard the New Covenant as not being in effect and if we deny that people are receiving the grace of the Holy Spirit in the Church.

 

[Guojing]

You mean other than Hebrews 8 which says that Jesus is the Mediator of a new and better Covenant which has rendered the old obsolete?

-CryptoLutheran

Show the exact verse and people can tell where is the past tense.

 

[Guojing]

We could literally just post the Nicene Creed, which I would assume / hope you agree with, since for our belief in the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come to be meaningful, the New Covenant must presently be in effect.

And likewise, for our believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, which Evangelicals interpret to refer to the Invisible Church of all Believers, and Roman Catholics to the Roman Catholic Church, and Anglicans and Old Catholics and Assyrians and Lutherans and Baptists and Congregationalists interpret according to their beliefs, but however one interprets this phrase, a belief in this church is meaningless, as is a belief in the Holy Spirit as the Lord, the Giver of Life, who Spake by the Prophets, if we regard the New Covenant as not being in effect and if we deny that people are receiving the grace of the Holy Spirit in the Church.

I asked for scripture.

If you don't know of any, just say so, and we can move on.

 

[The Liturgist]

I asked for scripture.

If you don't know of any, just say so, and we can move on.

I was not replying to your request for Scripture - other members have done that. i

Rather, what I am doing is asking you to assuage my concerns that your eschatology, which we might call “full-futirist”, might contradict the Nicene Creed, and the scriptures which incontrovertibly support it, since the status of the Nicene Creed as the definitive statement of Christian doctrine, the doctrinal equivalent of the 27 book New Testament Canon as the definitive index of the books of the New Testament*.

So to be clear, are you asking me to provide scriptural proof for the Nicene Creed? Or are you asking for someone to provide scriptural backing for the belief that the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, however you define it, is presently dispensing grace through Baptism, the Eucharist and so on, and that Christians at present can access this grace? Because if so, I would say that the scriptures that support the Nicene Creed provide that proof.

]*both of which, interestingly, were largely the result of the work of St. Athanasius, whereas ironically the Athanasian creed (which for reasons I shall explain presently I prefer to call Quincunque Vult) was not compiled by St. Athanasius but rather was first assembled some time after his death, by amalgamating some of his writings, and it was intended as a canticle or hymn, not a creed, since the canons of the Third Ecumenical Synod in Ephesus prohibit composing a new creed or modifying the Nicene Creed in its 381 Constantinopolitan recension as adopted by the Second Ecumenical Synod.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I asked for scripture.

If you don't know of any, just say so, and we can move on.

So, the Nicene Creed is a compilation of Scripture. Why are you rejecting it?

Statement of Faith​

The Nicene Creed​

We believe in (Romans 10:8-10; 1John 4:15)
ONE God, (Deuteronomy 6:4, Ephesians 4:6)
the Father (Matthew 6:9)
Almighty, (Exodus 6:3)
Maker of Heaven and Earth, (Genesis 1:1)
and of all things visible and invisible. (Colossians 1:15-16)
And in ONE Lord Jesus Christ, (Acts 11:17)
the Son of God, (Mathew 14:33; 16:16)
the Only-Begotten, (John 1:18; 3:16)
Begotten of the Father before all ages. (John 1:2)
Light of Light; (Psalm 27:1; John 8:12; Matthew 17:2,5)
True God of True God; (John 17:1-5)
Begotten, not made; (John 1:18)
of one essence with the Father (John 10:30)
by whom all things were made; (Hebrews 1:1-2)
Who for us men and for our salvation (1Timothy 2:4-5)
came down from Heaven, (John 6:33,35)
and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, (Luke 1:35)
and became man. (John 1:14)
And was crucified for us (Mark 15:25; 1Cointhians 15:3)
under Pontius Pilate, (John 19:6)
and suffered, (Mark 8:31)
and was buried. (Luke 23:53; 1Corinthians 15:4)
And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures. (Luke 24:1 1Corinthians 15:4)
And ascended into Heaven, (Luke 24:51; Acts 1:10)
and sits at the right hand of the Father. (Mark 16:19; Acts 7:55)
And He shall come again with glory (Matthew 24:27)
to judge the living and the dead; (Acts 10:42; 2Timothy 4:1)
whose Kingdom shall have no end. (2 Peter 1:11)
And in the Holy Spirit, (John 14:26)
the Lord, (Acts 5:3-4)
the Giver of Life, (Genesis 1:2)
Who proceeds from the Father; (John 15:26)
Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; (Matthew 3:16-17)
Who spoke through the prophets. (1 Samuel 19:20 ; Ezekiel 11:5,13) In one, (Matthew 16: 18)
holy, (1 Peter 2:5,9)
catholic*, (Mark 16:15)
and apostolic Church. (Acts 2:42; Ephesians 2:19-22)
I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins**. (Ephesians 4:5; Acts 2:38)
I look for the resurrection of the dead, (John 11:24; 1Corinthians 15:12-49; Hebrews 6:2; Revelation 20:5)
and the life of the world to come. (Mark 10:29-30)
AMEN. (Psalm 106:48)

 

[Guojing]

So, the Nicene Creed is a compilation of Scripture. Why are you rejecting it?

Statement of Faith​

The Nicene Creed​

We believe in (Romans 10:8-10; 1John 4:15)
ONE God, (Deuteronomy 6:4, Ephesians 4:6)
the Father (Matthew 6:9)
Almighty, (Exodus 6:3)
Maker of Heaven and Earth, (Genesis 1:1)
and of all things visible and invisible. (Colossians 1:15-16)
And in ONE Lord Jesus Christ, (Acts 11:17)
the Son of God, (Mathew 14:33; 16:16)
the Only-Begotten, (John 1:18; 3:16)
Begotten of the Father before all ages. (John 1:2)
Light of Light; (Psalm 27:1; John 8:12; Matthew 17:2,5)
True God of True God; (John 17:1-5)
Begotten, not made; (John 1:18)
of one essence with the Father (John 10:30)
by whom all things were made; (Hebrews 1:1-2)
Who for us men and for our salvation (1Timothy 2:4-5)
came down from Heaven, (John 6:33,35)
and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, (Luke 1:35)
and became man. (John 1:14)
And was crucified for us (Mark 15:25; 1Cointhians 15:3)
under Pontius Pilate, (John 19:6)
and suffered, (Mark 8:31)
and was buried. (Luke 23:53; 1Corinthians 15:4)
And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures. (Luke 24:1 1Corinthians 15:4)
And ascended into Heaven, (Luke 24:51; Acts 1:10)
and sits at the right hand of the Father. (Mark 16:19; Acts 7:55)
And He shall come again with glory (Matthew 24:27)
to judge the living and the dead; (Acts 10:42; 2Timothy 4:1)
whose Kingdom shall have no end. (2 Peter 1:11)
And in the Holy Spirit, (John 14:26)
the Lord, (Acts 5:3-4)
the Giver of Life, (Genesis 1:2)
Who proceeds from the Father; (John 15:26)
Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; (Matthew 3:16-17)
Who spoke through the prophets. (1 Samuel 19:20 ; Ezekiel 11:5,13) In one, (Matthew 16: 18)
holy, (1 Peter 2:5,9)
catholic*, (Mark 16:15)
and apostolic Church. (Acts 2:42; Ephesians 2:19-22)
I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins**. (Ephesians 4:5; Acts 2:38)
I look for the resurrection of the dead, (John 11:24; 1Corinthians 15:12-49; Hebrews 6:2; Revelation 20:5)
and the life of the world to come. (Mark 10:29-30)
AMEN. (Psalm 106:48)

Who is Israel?

Yep, they're called Christians. -CryptoLutheran At the end of the day, you interpret the "know the Lord" in Hebrews 8:11 in a very broad manner, hence you came to the conclusion that every Christian fulfills that today. We can agree to disagree on the meaning of "know" and move on.

www.christianforums.com

Follow the conversation

 

[ViaCrucis]

Show the exact verse and people can tell where is the past tense.

I'll provide them, but experience has taught me that it's not going to matter. You're going to ignore the biblical evidence anyway.

"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." - Hebrews 8:6

"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." - Hebrews 8:13

-CryptoLutheran

 

[The Liturgist]

Who is Israel?

Yep, they're called Christians. -CryptoLutheran At the end of the day, you interpret the "know the Lord" in Hebrews 8:11 in a very broad manner, hence you came to the conclusion that every Christian fulfills that today. We can agree to disagree on the meaning of "know" and move on.

www.christianforums.com

Follow the conversation

The issue is, I asked you to explain your doctrine in light of the Nicene Creed, since you’re the one making the claim that the New Covenant is not yet in effect, and you complained I hadn’t shown you the Scripture - well, Mark has, and meanwhile @ViaCrucis has satisfactorily provided scripture, so please kindly reply to my post and address my concerns about the Nicene compatibility of your views, because as far as I can tell, the view that the New Covenant is in the future directly contradicts several present-tense statements in the Creed.

 

[Guojing]

The issue is, I asked you to explain your doctrine in light of the Nicene Creed, since you’re the one making the claim that the New Covenant is not yet in effect, and you complained I hadn’t shown you the Scripture - well, Mark has, and meanwhile @ViaCrucis has satisfactorily provided scripture, so please kindly reply to my post and address my concerns about the Nicene compatibility of your views, because as far as I can tell, the view that the New Covenant is in the future directly contradicts several present-tense statements in the Creed.

In the first place, the Creed did not say the New Covenant is in effect.

 

[Guojing]

I'll provide them, but experience has taught me that it's not going to matter. You're going to ignore the biblical evidence anyway.

"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." - Hebrews 8:6

"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." - Hebrews 8:13

-CryptoLutheran

Interestingly I have already used Hebrews 8:13 in my reply to you, and highlighted it was in the future tense.

Are you now insisting that Hebrews 8:13 has already happened, when nothing in that verse indicates that it has?

The nation of Israel never accepted the New Covenant before they fell. (Acts 28:25-28, Romans 11:11)

 

[ViaCrucis]

Interestingly I have already used Hebrews 8:13 in my reply to you, and highlighted it was in the future tense.

Are you now insisting that Hebrews 8:13 has already happened, when nothing in that verse indicates that it has?

The nation of Israel never accepted the New Covenant before they fell. (Acts 28:25-28, Romans 11:11)

Like I said, you won't accept Scripture when it is provided to you.

Yes, Hebrews 8:13 very clearly states the New Covenant has been established. If you disagree, then you should not only get rid of the entire Epistle to the Hebrews from your Bible, but you should remove all 27 books of the New Testament.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[The Liturgist]

In the first place, the Creed did not say the New Covenant is in effect.

How do you figure?

 

[Guojing]

Yes, Hebrews 8:13 very clearly states the New Covenant has been established.

You have a different level of English comprehension than me.