The Pattern

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by Amanah

.

This post is mostly about the timing of the effects of things received by following/obeying the Pattern.

A redeemer paid the price for the redemption of what was lost in Eden. What was lost, which needed to be recovered? We read of changes and among the changes were those of the universe/creation.

Were these changes a part of what was lost? Perhaps, but we are not given specifics in Ge3 as to all that was lost. Certainly, part of what was lost was described by the Lord who said 'you will die'. Adam will have lost Life. Adam did not physically die that day. Does this then indicate that all which was lost was only Life?

Ro8 tells us 18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. 19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. 23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. 24 For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance. Does Paul indicate that redemption involves restoring creation? Maybe.

Perhaps Paul means only the body and not the spiritual parts of Man, when saying 'body'. Thinking of the body of Man, vs the spirit side, it is redeemed as a part of the whole creation which Paul refers to. Wasn't the whole Man redeemed? Yes. What had purchased the redemption of our dead spirit, Paul has linked together with what purchases the redemption of our body and creation. Man and creation. The Blood has done this buy back.

While our receiving of what is referenced by 'the Pattern' brings an immediate change in our spirit - immediately giving it Life which was lost - this immediate effect is not seen in our body/the universe. It does not undergo immediate restorative redemptive changes, yet. It must wait for the times Paul mentions in Ro8. It is in our future. The effect of redemption is instantaneous for the spirit but not for the body. Apparently its restorative effects are produced in stages. (What some contend, is the effects of redemption is the availability of healing for every believer's body, said to be promised to potentially happen today, depending on Man's faith. Yet can it not be said that this is promised by Paul to happen in the future as a part of the restoration of creation/bodies, contradicting their claim that it is for today?)

Acts 3:21 the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began. Perhaps Acts and Romans refer to the same thing. All things will be restored in our future, but the Life for the spirit now.

Amanah, you may want to add to what is 'renewed by the Pattern', the creation. The Blood of Jesus has paid the price of its restoration, according to Ro8. The earth must be 'born again' and in time it will be. It has been 'baptized' in the flood and will yet receive the fire (of the Holy Ghost), 2Pe3. This fits the Pattern.

How it can be possible that the universe could be 'born again', I do not know. I have no explanation as to how it could fit the Pattern. This then also making the idea of the earth fitting the pattern somewhat suspect.

See also Eph1.10 and Col1.20

[Amanah]

Thank you Don!

[Amanah]

This Bible study explores the continuity of God’s law, the transition from the Old to the New Covenant, and the distinction between ceremonial "shadows" and eternal moral commands.

1. The Foundation: The Ten Commandments as Covenant Law:
The Ten Commandments are not merely a list of rules but the "words of the covenant" (Exodus 34:28). While the Old Covenant was written on stone, the New Covenant promises a internal transformation. The Ten commandments stand as is:

* Unchanging Character: Because God does not change (Malachi 3:6), the moral standards reflecting His nature remain.

* The Law in the Heart: Jeremiah 31:33 and Hebrews 8:10 describe the New Covenant as God putting His laws into our minds and writing them on our hearts.

* The Israel/Judah Connection: It is vital to note that the New Covenant was explicitly promised to "the house of Israel and the house of Judah" (Jeremiah 31:31).

******
2. The Grafting In: Acts 2:38 and the New Birth:
If the covenant was promised to Israel, how do others participate? The Apostolic doctrine teaches that Gentiles are "grafted in" to the olive tree of Israel (Romans 11:17-24).

* The Apostolic Formula: In Acts 2:38, Peter provides the key to this entrance:

* Repentance: Turning away from sin.
* Water Baptism: Specifically in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.
* The Holy Spirit: Receiving the gift of the Spirit, which empowers the believer to keep the law "in the spirit." God's law is written in our hearts.

******
3. The "Book of the Law" vs. The Moral Law.
There is a distinction between the Ten Commandments and the "Book of the Law" (Torah) added at Sinai:

* Added because of Transgressions: Galatians 3:19 explains that the ceremonial law was a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ.
* Shadows and Types: Ceremonial requirements (like animal sacrifices) were "shadows" of things to come (Hebrews 10:1).
* Spiritual Application: While the literal animal sacrifice ended, the principle remains. We now offer the "sacrifice of praise" (Hebrews 13:15), and our bodies have become the "Temple of the Holy Spirit" (1 Corinthians 6:19).

******
4. The Sabbath: An Eternal Creation Mandate.
Unlike the ceremonial laws added at Sinai, the Sabbath was instituted at Creation (Genesis 2:2-3), before sin entered the world.

* Not a Shadow: Since it predates the sacrificial system, it is viewed not as a temporary "type" but as an eternal sign between God and His people (Exodus 31:17).

* The 7th Day: The command is specific to the seventh day as a day of rest and holy convocation, standing apart from the man-made tradition of Sunday worship.

******
5. Purity in Worship: Avoiding the "Sin of Jeroboam"

The Bible warns against mixing the holy with the profane. Jeroboam (1 Kings 12:26-33) famously led Israel into sin by:

* Setting up golden calves (Idolatry).
* Changing the timing of the feasts to "a month which he had devised of his own heart."

The Modern Application: Current holidays (Christmas, Easter, Valentine's Day, Halloween) mirror the "Sin of Jeroboam" by replacing God's ordained times with traditions rooted in paganism.

******
6. The Feasts of the Lord (Leviticus 23):
The feasts listed in Leviticus 23 are described as "The Feasts of the LORD," not merely "Feasts of the Jews." They serve as a prophetic timeline for the Messiah. The feasts teach the gospel and the Second Coming.

*The Spring Feasts (Passover, ULB, First Fruits, Pentecost) were Fulfilled by Christ’s first coming, death, resurrection, and the outpouring of the Spirit.

*The fall Feasts (Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles) Point toward Christ’s second coming, the Millennial reign, and the New Heaven and Earth.

*By observing the Sabbath and the Feasts, the believer aligns themselves with God’s prophetic calendar rather than the secular or pagan traditions (idolatry) of the world.

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by Amanah

.

You've said lots of good things, Amanah.

Nothing said by me here should be thought to contradict what you have said.

There is an unwritten Law of Firsts: The former rules over the latter. If there is an apparent contradiction between the latter and the first, the latter should be interpreted by the light of the first, because that which has long existed came first. Subsequently: what is said to be said by God later, must not be seen to be contradicting what God said at the first. So with the OT/NT.

For example: Whatever God is said to say in the Beginning would not be contradicted by what he later says, because he does not speak error at any time. He would not and cannot contradict himself.

Therefore, the NT would not, should not be seen to, contradict the OT. The OT then, is seen as the foundation which the NT is built upon, because it is 'first'.

The earthly justice system incorporates this in what it calls 'precedence'. Rulings made by a judge today, cannot contradict past rulings made by a judge (unless an error is discovered in the older judgment).

Anything which comes after the OT must not contradict the OT. The NT is the continuing way of God which followed after the time of the OT, which did not contradict it.

Consequently: Ac2 is the first day of the NT. Anything which comes after Ac2 must not contradict 'precedence', the 'first' of Ac2. As such, Ac2 lays the foundation for all the ways the NT is interpreted by those who follow after. They must agree with Ac2 or be seen as wrong.

[Amanah]

Originally Posted by donfriesen1

You've said lots of good things, Amanah.

Nothing said by me here should be thought to contradict what you have said.

There is an unwritten Law of Firsts: The former rules over the latter. If there is an apparent contradiction between the latter and the first, the latter should be interpreted by the light of the first, because that which has long existed came first. Subsequently: what is said to be said by God later, must not be seen to be contradicting what God said at the first. So with the OT/NT.

For example: Whatever God is said to say in the Beginning would not be contradicted by what he later says, because he does not speak error at any time. He would not and cannot contradict himself.

Therefore, the NT would not, should not be seen to, contradict the OT. The OT then, is seen as the foundation which the NT is built upon, because it is 'first'.

The earthly justice system incorporates this in what it calls 'precedence'. Rulings made by a judge today, cannot contradict past rulings made by a judge (unless an error is discovered in the older judgment).

Anything which comes after the OT must not contradict the OT. The NT is the continuing way of God which followed after the time of the OT, which did not contradict it.

Consequently: Ac2 is the first day of the NT. Anything which comes after Ac2 must not contradict 'precedence', the 'first' of Ac2. As such, Ac2 lays the foundation for all the ways the NT is interpreted by those who follow after. They must agree with Ac2 or be seen as wrong.

I think the reason there is disagreement on interpretation is because many are not familiar with the old testament, but are instead following the traditions and doctrine of men. Or scripture is taken out of context. The new testament was written by Judeans who were immersed in the Torah and in the context of second temple Judaism.

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by Amanah

The new testament was written by Judeans who were immersed in the Torah and in the context of second temple Judaism.

Agreed, it is the context the NT should be understood with.

[donfriesen1]

Originally Posted by Amanah

.

4. The Sabbath: An Eternal Creation Mandate.
Unlike the ceremonial laws added at Sinai, the Sabbath was instituted at Creation (Genesis 2:2-3), before sin entered the world.

* Not a Shadow: Since it predates the sacrificial system, it is viewed not as a temporary "type" but as an eternal sign between God and His people (Exodus 31:17).

* The 7th Day: The command is specific to the seventh day as a day of rest and holy convocation, standing apart from the man-made tradition of Sunday worship.


Food for thought:

Do you agree that this Creation-Sabbath was not commanded and is without specifics? Your use of the words mandated and instituted indicate you may not. If given without specifics at the Beginning, is it then left to Man to work out the details to their liking? If commanded, wouldn't God have included specifics so Man could see/say they have complied?

Further to this: if God only exemplifies something (like this Sabbath), do you think it automatically indicates that it is a requirement of Man to follow, as if commanded? What reasoning or scripture could be presented to bolster this thought as right?

To bolster the thought, consider God's words with Cain. God had not commanded blood sacrifices that we have a record of, but did model them. His words to Cain can be seen to indicate that Cain should have 'caught on' to what was only exemplified. But is conjecture enough to say it is meant definitively? When God is not clear, none should say he spoke clearly.

What is seen in the Creation-Sabbath is an example of the ways of God with Man for the first 2500 yrs of Man's existence (after the Garden), when there was no Law. I suggest that when God made Man in his image, that this was enough for Man to live righteously, to discern right and wrong, using the conscience and rational thought, along with rational discernment of the actions of God as leading them. In other words: here's life. Make the best of it you can with what I've given you, without my Word telling you in detail what I expect. My image in you is enough.

Would you agree that this Creation-Sabbath is not the Sabbath seen in the Covenant with Jews; ie, the requirements they were under in Covenant are not included in the non-covenantal Creation-Sabbath?

Would you say the Creation-Sabbath was that which was referenced in the 10 Commandments and was thus applicable to all Men, and not just the Jew? Or, would you say the Decalogue was just for the Jew? Although the 10 Commandments are addressed to the Jew, Ex20.2, hasn't it always been understood that their words are applicable to all humans, even those outside of Jewish Covenant? Was this wrong to do? Was this right to do? What could be referenced to answer the question raised? Does Paul answer the question?

Whether the Creation-Sabbath (without a Covenant requiring it) of the Decalogue is for all Mankind or not, it remains true that what was required of the Jew by Covenant was not only the Creation-Sabbath. The requirements of their Sabbath in their Covenant was later expanded on. Things were added to it which were not specified for the Creation-Sabbath. These were for the Jew alone.

Apparently then, the non-covenantal Creation-Sabbath was not the same as the covenantal Sabbath Jews were given. Do you agree?

Is any day (of rest) adequate to fulfill what is seen exemplified in God's creation-time rest or must a certain day be used to satisfy a non-commanded day of rest, the Creation-Sabbath? Since God gave no specifics in the Beginning, leaving it up to Man to determine, as a man I'd say any day of the week is fine. Another Man might say 'no'. Applying Ro14 principles may then be necessary.
***********

* Not a Shadow: Since it predates the sacrificial system, it is viewed not as a temporary "type" but as an eternal sign between God and His people (Exodus 31:17). Plz expand on what you say here, to give clarity to your indications.

The context of Ex31 is definitely the time of the Law. Creation-Sabbath is referenced for what purpose, by God? To bolster that a Law which he gives needing justification? I think not. Perhaps he is using a literary method - parallelism. Because the first is seen right, the second which is similar is also right. God does not need to justify any of his commands. That he says them is enough. When he does justify, it adds clarity/instruction and is welcomed by Man when doing so.

Related in thought, perhaps: The Flood pre-dates the sacrificial system you reference, and Peter calls it an antitype. 1Pe3. Could it be possible the Creation-Sabbath is also a type then, though pre-dating the sacrificial system?

[Amanah]

The 7th-day Sabbath is biblically rooted in the creation narrative (Genesis 2:2-3) as a day God blessed and sanctified, later included in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:8-11) as a memorial of that creation. And then affirmed as an eternal sign between God and His people (Exodus 31:17).

I think God is making it clear that the 7th day Sabbath is to be observed as one of his appointed times.

Leviticus 23:3 AMP
For six days work may be done, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of complete rest, a holy convocation (calling together). You shall not do any work [on that day]; it is the Sabbath of the Lord wherever you may be.

[Amanah]

But Don, It's okay if you don't agree. I'm just sharing my understanding.