Matthew 16:27-28 and the Passing of Torah, and Israel's Feast Days

I was raised believing that the Law of Moses, all of it, was nailed to the cross. I have learned however, that this view is false! Matthew 16:27f is based on OT prophecies. Jesus said none of the OT could pass until it was ALL fulfilled. Therefore, until Matthew 16:27-28 was fulfilled, Torah could not pass. Furtrhermore, the Feast Days of Israel prove this definitively! Great stuff here!

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Matthew 16:27-28
• Second Coming Don K Preston
• Preston's Ponderings
• Law of Moses
• Feast Days of Israel
• Resurrection
• Passing of the Law

[HannahSpiceland]

Whole books of the New Testament were devoted to refuting the error that the law was still binding! Apparently this man has never read Galatians or Colossians which specifically address the fact the was NOT valid or binding! This sort of lesson goes to show how men can argue and reason themselves into almost any error.

[MrDonPreston]

@HannahSpiceland

Hannah, whole books may have been written affirming the passing of Torah at the cross but they are wrong. Colossians and Galatians do not say Torah had passed. They tell Christians not to go back under Torah, and they tell Gentile Christians they were not bound to Torah. Huge, huge difference!

Paul affirmed that Christians had died to Torah-- Not that Torah had died. This is the distinction that you are overlooking. Read my debate with Kurt Simmons to see more on this.

[YaHuWaHservant]

@sdabernathy Peter the apostle said Paul's writing is hard to understand and those who lack understanding will be lead to destruction. The law of animal sacrifice was fulfilled in the sacrifice of the Messiah. However things such as the dietary law and the royal law have yet to be fulfilled. Even in revelations we shall be judged according to our works upon the earth even if we profess to love Jesus. He said If you love me keep my commandments. To know all his commandments you must know the OT

[Starrjoneli]

@HannahSpiceland Well, James told Paul to prove to the Christians that were zealous of the law that HE obeyed the law. Acts 21:20-26 shows that Paul purified himself and made an offering with some other men to prove he obeyed the Law of Moses.

[alexander76rw]

23Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again.

24Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. 25Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

26And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

John 11:23-26

[sdabernathy]

@HannahSpiceland Please read Romans 10 v4 "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." - especially those last five words. Should get you on the right track. If you did not believe and were a Jew - the law was very much still binding. If you believed, to return to the law was "falling from grace" as you said. BTW - Gentiles were never subject to the Law of Moses. This is dealing only with Israel.  Don Preston is spot on.

[Starrjoneli]

@HannahSpiceland I think Don Preston would agree that we are saved by grace.

[Starrjoneli]

@HannahSpiceland The law had waxed old and was ready to vanish away but it wasn't gone (Heb 8:13). The Jews didn't become a Christian one day and suddenly not have to follow their law the next. Paul kept the law of Moses and even offered sacrifices. Sacrifices were still made until AD 70 when the temple was destroyed. The son of the bondwoman and the son of the freewoman grew together in one house until the son of the freewoman was weaned.

[HannahSpiceland]

I read a debate between him and someone who said Preston was guilty of corrupting the gospel because he says we are not saved by the addition of grace, but the removal of law. Preston believes that not until AD 70 was anyone justified and then only because the law was removed. But this guy said that is a corruption of the gospel, because it is the addition of grace that saves us. Moral law still condemns us today but because of the addition of grace we can be saved.

[HannahSpiceland]

Yes, now the law is not binding. He agrees with that. But he said it was binding until AD 70, which is clearly false. The laws against associating with Gentiles, the dietary laws, the feasts and animal sacrifices were all done away at the cross. See Eph. 2:14 "He hath abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law contained in ordinances." Could it be more clear? How can he argue the law lasted until AD 70? Nonsense!

[alexander76rw]

Yeah, how could God be trusted if He didnt keep the promises made to the fathers...He had to fulfill the promises to them before He could go to the rest of the world.