(September 27, 2015 at 10:44 pm)Aractus Wrote: Whilst I agree that broadly speaking the covenants that God makes combine blessings and responsibilities, there are exceptions where a covenant is simply blessings with no strings attached, that is no responsibilities expected of the Israelites to receive the blessing. The Abrahamic Covenant is an unconditional covenant - God does not expect anything in return. It is given well before the instruction to keep the practise of circumcision, and that is merely a seal - a sign from God - not a condition for receiving the promised land. The Jews had kept this custom anyway, they didn't break it, so for what reason did they lose their eternal inheritance?
The promise to Abraham was unconditional, but Deuteronomy 28-30 develops the covenant relationship with Israel further, and here the success/failure issue comes into play.
Quote:It was was it? So why does Jesus say "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Matt 5:17-18. You couldn't get a statement any stronger in favour of keeping the Law of Moses.
<snip>
What Paul taught and what Jesus taught are two entirely different things.
The key parts are “I am come to fulfil (the law and prophets)...till all be fulfilled”.
Paul analyses at length the purpose of the Torah/covenant relationship, and concludes that, in a way no-one had quite been expecting, the covenant had been completed, and the purpose of Torah had- successfully -been accomplished. Given the new kind of Judaism that had arrived, post Torah, there was a different approach to food (Mark 7:14-23; Jesus declared foods clean. Also Peter's dream about food Acts 10).
The key part of Paul's analysis here is that the Torah was acting as a nanny; with the coming of faithfulness/pistis the child grew up and no longer needed the nanny. He sees that Torah was able to draw sin into one place- Israel- where it could be dealt with (the echoes from Dt 28-30 are very important here).
Jesus also put a lot of effort into moving Judaism into a post Torah world. (Much more than is generally realised by today's church; as modern third Quest theology explains how Jewish the whole business was, that should change.) In fact far from contradicting Paul, that passage affirms his position; the mission of Jesus is not to go against what Torah and prophets had to say, but to fulfil their purpose.
BTW, who is in your picture?
