Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: XeniaSt; DouglasKC
"ARE, not "were"."

Great catch on the verse.

Not exactly. From Paul's perspective "are" would be correct since the temple was still standing and the temporal/temporary Levitical priesthood was still ministering according to the bloody requirements of the old covenant, the covenant that was decaying and passing away. AD70 was the fulfillment of the "days of vengeance" meted out against unrepentant Israel.

From our perspective, 2000 years since the temple was destroyed and the keys of the Kingdom were transferred from national Israel to spiritual Israel, the Church, the phrase I used was quite correct.

11 posted on 09/10/2007 4:02:44 PM PDT by topcat54 ("... knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience." (James 1:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: topcat54; DouglasKC; Campion

DKC>"ARE, not "were"."

XS>Great catch on the verse.

Not exactly. From Paul's perspective "are" would be correct since the temple was still standing and the temporal/temporary Levitical priesthood was still ministering according to the bloody requirements of the old covenant, the covenant that was decaying and passing away. AD70 was the fulfillment of the "days of vengeance" meted out against unrepentant Israel.

From our perspective, 2000 years since the temple was destroyed and the keys of the Kingdom were transferred from national Israel to spiritual Israel, the Church, the phrase I used was quite correct.

11 posted on 09/10/2007 5:02:44 PM MDT by topcat54

If I understand you correctly Elohim's Holy Word i.e. Yah'shua HaMashiach

was correct for forty years, but

is incorrect today because it conflicts with your eisgesis.

How does this square with your belief that all scripture was fulfilled in 70 AD.

shalom b'shem Yah'shua
13 posted on 09/10/2007 5:11:08 PM PDT by Uri’el-2012 (you shall know that I, YHvH, your Savior, and your Redeemer, am the Elohim of Ya'aqob. Isaiah 60:16)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: topcat54; XeniaSt
Not exactly. From Paul's perspective "are" would be correct since the temple was still standing and the temporal/temporary Levitical priesthood was still ministering according to the bloody requirements of the old covenant, the covenant that was decaying and passing away.

That makes no sense.

In the first place Paul wasn't decrying the Lord's holy days. He was telling fellow Christians not to let others judge them in HOW they were observing them.

You MUST believe Paul was either a liar or stupid if you think he was telling others not to observe the Lord's holy days.

This is because whatever Paul was addressing in Galatians 2 had specific, identifying elements:

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

The Lord's holy days are NOT philosophy, but scriptural commands of the Lord. The only scripture Paul had was the "old" testament.

They are not "traditions of men", but holy days created by the God of the universe.

They are NOT "rudiments of the world", but holy objects of the divine.

Paul surely knew this. Do you think he was lying, or just stupid? Paul, who was under the new covenant, is addressing other Christians, who are also under the new covenant. You're saying AD70 was the fulfillment of the "days of vengeance" meted out against unrepentant Israel.

16 posted on 09/10/2007 8:15:10 PM PDT by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson