Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>]

Yonah Mishael wrote:
> > HH: The fact that God does not change in his essential character (Mal
> > 3:6) does not mean that he does not act differently at different times,
> > for the Bible shows that he does. You must prove claims such as there
> > being "one covenant" from the Bible itself, which you have not done so
> > far. There are actually quite a number of covenants, and to suggest that
> > they cannot imply a change in God's procedures is a big claim. Frankly,
> > Jer 31:31-33 itself shows that it is unsustainable because it posits a
> > difference between the Mosaic covenant and the new covenant., which, as
> > Gary, stressed, is not like the old covenant.
> >
> > HH: Your claim to not be a Christian is odd in the face of your comments
> > above. You are putting yourself forward as a disciple of Y'shua by your
> > comments above, not to mention you quotation of Gal. 3:27-29 at the
> > bottom of your posts. You may be giving a technical meaning to the word
> > "Christian" that is not true to the NT, which uses it as an umbrella
> > terms for all the disciples of Y'shua. By the way, you need to add the
> > chapter number 3 to your quote of Gal 3:27-29. Right now all you have
> > are the verse numbers and the book abbreviation.
> >
> > לֹא כַבְּרִית אֲשֶׁר כָּרַתִּי אֶת אֲבוֹתָם בְּיוֹם הֶחֱזִיקִי בְיָדָם
> > לְהוֹצִיאָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם אֲשֶׁר הֵמָּה הֵפֵרוּ אֶת בְּרִיתִי
> > וְאָנֹכִי בָּעַלְתִּי בָם, נְאֻם ה׳
> > L) KBRYT )$R KRTY )T )BWTM BYWM HXZYKY BYDM LHWCY)M M)RC MCRYM )$R HMH
> > HPRW )T BRYTY W)NKY B(LTY BM, N)M H'.
> >
> > The fact that it would be "not according to/as/like the covenant which
> > (HaShem) made with (our) fathers" does not mean that it is essentially
> > a different covenant. It means that it has a different outcome -- it
> > is not broken or abused. The terms of this "new covenant" are no
> > different that the many times a "covenant of peace" or "everlasting
> > covenant" are mentioned in regard to the גאולה G)WLH [redemption]. The
> > terms are even clear in this passage:
> >
> > 1. It is a covenant with the two divisions of Israel -- namely, Israel
> > and Judah. It is prophecied very plainly throughout the writings of
> > the prophets that the two divisions would be joined together again and
> > become one sceptor in the hands of Mashiach, the rightful and anointed
> > king of Israel.
> >
> > 2. It would entail God's dwelling among the people forever, and the
> > people would be eternally covenanted to him and never again be called
> > "not my people" (as in Hosea's prophecies).
> >
> > 3. There will be forgiveness of iniquity (specifically, that of the
> > idolatry of previous ages) and full knowledge of Torah and of God.
> >
> > I just cannot agree with your basic premise, that the "new covenant"
> > is essentially different from the covenant made with the fathers. It
> > is a renewed version of the same covenant -- centered on Torah -- but
> > it will not have the weakness of the former covenant, since it will be
> > a more complete redemption, and the people will know HaShem fully
> > without needing to be instructed. It is the same as the other
> > covenants mentioned in the words of the prophets. If you need a list
> > of references, I will provide one from a concordance.
> >     

HH: One issue is the meaning of ToRaH in this passage. I believe it is 
God's instruction, but I don't believe it is exactly the Mosaic law. 
Steve already mentioned one issue. Related to that, do you take the 
following words as referring just to past sin, or do you think Israel 
will be committing sin in the future, once they have the law written on 
their hearts?

Jer. 31:34 No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his 
brother, saying,  ‘Know the LORD,’ because they will all know me, from 
the least of them to the greatest,” declares the LORD.  “For I will 
forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more.”

Yours,
Harold Holmyard