Grace - Old & New Testament

[SputnikBoy]

We seem to be at loggerheads over the issue of grace. WHOEVER the Ten Commandments were given to, it's a fact that ALL who were saved in the Old Testament were saved by grace alone, NOT by keeping the Law. And yet, the Law was important and binding for them and an essential part of their faith.

So, why is it that New Testament Christians figure that they are saved by grace and yet are NOT obliged to keep the Law? What is the difference in regard to 'the criteria' for the saved person, whether they be OT believers or NT believers? As long as the Law is no longer binding on present-day Christians, what then is the essential part of our faith? And please don't simply say "a belief in Jesus Christ" without some description as to what is required of us.

 

[wavy]

You are correct. Except most people have it in their minds that law was the "old way" and grace is the "new way".

Ridiculous. If Yahweh never changes (Malachi 3:6), what in the world makes us think that since we STILL obtain favor through Messiah, we must not keep Torah?

 

[farley]

I hate to stick my neck out here, but it sure would be nice if you guys would agree that the law (Torah) as expressed by the NT...

John 14:15 KJV
(15) If ye love me, keep my commandments.

...is the law we, of this age, should be keeping!

In Christ,

farley

 

[wavy]

As revealed by a poster (can't remember who it was), this was a direct refernce to Yahshua as YHWH:

Exodus 20:6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Thus Yahshua's commandments are the same. To say otherwise would mean to say he is contrasting himself with his Father.

 

[farley]

I beg to differ.

I know that the difference is slight, but, for instance, fornication was a sin under the old law.

Under the new law, even the THOUGHT of fornication, is just as bad as the act.

So, in my view, there is a difference. Not to mention the absence of the fourth commandment in the NT.

In Christ,

farley

 

[wavy]

Luke 23:56 And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.

Written after the death, resurrection and ascension of Messiah by Luke, who still considered this a commandment.

Messiah also mentions it in regards to still being kept in the future in Matthew 24:20 (not to mention the fact that the apostles still kept it along with the feasts throughout the NT).

And bestiality is nowhere mentioned in the NT. May we now have sex with animals? No proof of a "new law" either.

As far as fornication being in the mind too as some type of contrast between the Torah and the New Covenant, I don't believe that.

Do you truly believe that before Messiah came men didn't understand that it was sin and evil to even think bad thoughts?

Messiah was a teacher. There were many teachers who expounded on the Torah. He wasn't establishing anything new, he was just telling the truth.

So, no, there is no difference.

 

[Imagican]

OK guys,

Are we to ONLY live by the laws of the 'ten commandments', or ALL the law of the OT?

 

[TruthHunter]

The difference is that in the fullfiillment of one covenant or creation of a new convenant the laws changed. God is unchanging, but what he reveals to us adds a deeper more meaningfull relationship thus our understanding is sometimes dependant upon the Covenant Laws. If Noah could eat anything he wanted, then why is it ok for God to tell Moses that they have to keep Koshar? Because it is a new Covenant, thus new laws. Christ was the fullfillment of the Old Covenant, and created a new Covenant. He gives us a new Law. to eat his Flesh and drink his Blood. To help those we find in need, to be baptised, and to have faith in him. Keeping the Law of God is important, but the Law of God after the New Testament is not the same as the Law before the New Testament.

Ben

 

[Imagican]

Wavy, Spunt? All the law of the OT or 'just the ten commandments'?

 

[wavy]

The difference is that in the fullfiillment of one covenant or creation of a new convenant the laws changed.

And where is this in scripture? It is found nowhere in Jeremiah 31:31-34. He mentions his laws, not any new laws.

And if there are new laws, which ones would these be?

If Noah could eat anything he wanted, then why is it ok for God to tell Moses that they have to keep Koshar?

I don't believe Noah could eat anything he wanted, but anyway, when Yahweh adds something, it doesn't take away from what is previously revealed (as far as contents). The only think that can be taken away, according to what is in the Word is what is corrupt. The priesthood, our sins, the division between both houses of Israel etc...

Nowhere does Yahweh say anything about new laws.

Because it is a new Covenant, thus new laws.

Again, how is this witnessed by scripture?

 

[wavy]

Wavy, Spunt? All the law of the OT or 'just the ten commandments'?

all that possibly applies.

 

[SputnikBoy]

Wavy, Spunt? All the law of the OT or 'just the ten commandments'?

What say about the 'grace' issue, Imagican? Why do present-day 'Spirit-filled' Christians keep saying that they are 'now under grace' as though this is a new feature designed specifically for them? It's simply not true but they keep pushing it as though it is. And they are 'Spirit-filled' no less!

As for your question, no, of course we're not to keep all of the OT laws. The ones concerning bulls and goats are most definitely out.

 

[Solo]

6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, 7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: 12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: 15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. 16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. 18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. 19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb: 20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; 21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. 22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; 24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; 25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification. Romans 4:6-25

 

[Imagican]

Wavy, Spunt? All the law of the OT or 'just the ten commandments'?

all that possibly applies.

Huh?

 

[Imagican]

Wavy, Spunt? All the law of the OT or 'just the ten commandments'?

What say about the 'grace' issue, Imagican? Why do present-day 'Spirit-filled' Christians keep saying that they are 'now under grace' as though this is a new feature designed specifically for them? It's simply not true but they keep pushing it as though it is. And they are 'Spirit-filled' no less!

As for your question, no, of course we're not to keep all of the OT laws. The ones concerning bulls and goats are most definitely out.

Ephesians 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, 2. If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward. 3. How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4. Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5. Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6. That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

If this doesn't PLAINLY STATE that grace DIDN'T exist for Gentiles PREVIOUS to the coming of Christ, His death and resurrection, I don't know what Paul is saying.

Grace has ALWAYS existed as far as God giving to man. But for a time, God's blessings were for 'His people only'. Gentiles DIDN'T EVEN KNOW OF GOD.

Don't even try to pick and choose. The ONLY people, (Gentiles), that we know of that knew God or received ANY of His Blessings were those people that came in contact with the Hebrews or Jews through their enslavements.

You who believe that ALL mankind are descendants of Adam and Eve are incapable of understanding this grace. The World was NOT populated only by the descendants of Adam and Eve. They were the second creation who actually had communion with God. The first creation didn't have this opportunity until the coming of Christ.

I know, I know, crazy huh? Read it for yourself. The message was sent, many just chose to ignore it, bringing with this ignorance, MUCH confusion as to the 'history of man'.

God has ALWAYS given to those that knew Him. Given and taken. But for those that knew Him NOT, there was NO grace before the Spirit could be partaken of. Without the inheritance of the Spirit, there was not grace for these.

Did the Romans know of God before Christ? Did the Egyptians know of God before the Hebrews they enslaved? Did the Maori know God before missionaries suffered the voyage to their land in order to offer the Word? Come on man, don't you get it. The Word and world are much different than you seem to realize. It hasn't always been as it is now. The world use to be a VERY LARGE place. People separated by vast distances. Different cultures and different Gods. Separated by but one thing that matters, GRACE. The gift of God offered through His Son.

Grace has always existed but did NOT abound until the bringing of the Spirit through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Now, as to the law, the Bible PLAINLY states once again, that if one chooses to live, 'by the law', this person is bound by 'EVERY LETTER' of it. Not just the law that 'they choose', but ALL THE LAW. You guys seem to want to 'pick' which laws we are bound to. I say that once you start down this road, you make Christs' death void and barren of effect.

Law produced sin, for before law, THERE WAS NO SIN. What was the 'first law' given to Adam? What was the first sin committed by Adam? Without the law, there WAS NO SIN. Get it?

So, in order for the appeasement of sin, God allowed sacrifice, but told the Hebrews then that it would not always be so. What would change? Christ!!! Christ would one day be THE SACRIFICE for SIN. At that point all the teaching of law would be fulfilled through CHRIST. Christ defeated SIN, thereby fulfilling the law. Now we will live by ONE LAW. Do you know what that 'ONE LAW' is? ALL that has been offered by God is through GRACE and GRACE ALONE. Don't believe it? Then work yourself to death through the law to NO AVAIL. For without faith there IS NO GRACE.

And THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE THE JEWS ARE STUCK TODAY. Jealous that they are no longer THE ONLY chosen of God, but the Gentiles too are 'the sons of God' through the Sacrifice of JESUS CHRIST. One who they continue to refuse until ALL ARE FORCED TO UNDERSTAND. Still stuck in 'their laws', still bound by the chains of sin through their denial of the One who could set them free.

So, NO amount of adherence to 'the law' is of ANY affect NOW. We are to live by faith and NOT BY LAW. Faith in Christ who freed us from the 'law'. The law brought sin, sin brought death, Christ died 'that' death ONCE AND FOR ALL for THEM THAT BELIEVE.

Bottom line: God loves us folks. Whether you believe it or not. He loves us SO MUCH that He allowed His Son to DIE FOR US. He led His people through the 'law' and 'they STILL TURNED THEIR BACKS ON HIM. They ONLY became more and more 'against' God through this 'law'.

The law accomplished what it was meant to: through the law a remnant was preserved until such time as the 'law' was fulfilled. We NOW abide in GRACE through the Spirit, through FAITH. And there is BUT ONE LAW. Two parts, but ONE LAW.

Does this mean that we are to 'break' the laws simply because they have been fulfilled? NO WAY. We are now to COMPLETE THE LAW. ALL OF IT. And what was the law designed to 'teach' us and how are we to fulfill it? Come on, I know you know the answer....................... Exactly. For if we offer this one little bitty thing, we have fulfilled ALL THE LAW. That's what law was made for. For those that DIDN'T know how to do this one little bitty thing without being bound to the laws that defined it. But NOW GRACE ABOUNDS. Why? Because Christ came and gave us a personal example, (how a man can), fulfill the law. Through that one itty bitty thing. And that itty bitty thing is EVERYTHING. Follow me so far?

So, if you will understand and follow this 'ONE LAW' you will then: put away your childish things and speak like a 'man', then; 'coming into the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the FULLNESS of Christ'.

Learn this 'one thing' guys and you too have fulfilled ALL THE LAW. And NO MANNER of ADHERENCE TO LAW CAN OFFER THIS ONE THING. IT IS THROUGH THIS ONE THING THAT THE LAW CAN BE FULFILLED. Not through your efforts to follow the 'laws', but through the understanding of the 'ONE LAW' will you and your fellow man be 'the sons of God'.

What IS God folks? Exactly. And this can be US TOO. We just needed a bunch of practice and the 'perfect example' to get it right. That perfect example has been given; Now THE GRACE HAS BEEN OFFERED. Given freely to all who will accept it. Regardless and even IN SPITE OF THE LAW. For the law was NOT LOVE, but the path to it.

Now what do you choose to follow: the laws of man or the love of God?

 

[kwag_myers]

The difference is that in the fullfiillment of one covenant or creation of a new convenant the laws changed.

And where is this in scripture? It is found nowhere in Jeremiah 31:31-34. He mentions his laws, not any new laws.

And if there are new laws, which ones would these be?

I think you may have missed the point in Jeremiah 31. What God is telling us is that the law will be in our hearts. Which is to say that each of us will be held to a standard set by the Holy Spirit, and not the written law. This is discussed in Hebrews chapters 8-10.

One thing that has changed is the sin offering (Hebrews 10:18). Another thing that has changed is the access to the Holy of Holies (Hebrews 10:19) which is no longer reserved for just the High Priest, and no longer limited to once a year.

Hebrews 10:25 is a new commandment to gather together, assemble.

Nowhere does Yahweh say anything about new laws.

John 13:34 (1 John 2:7-8); 1 Timothy 6:1-14; 1 John 3:23

 

[wavy]

I think you may have missed the point in Jeremiah 31. What God is telling us is that the law will be in our hearts. Which is to say that each of us will be held to a standard set by the Holy Spirit, and not the written law. This is discussed in Hebrews chapters 8-10.

No, I think you have missed the point. I don't think you understand Jeremiah 31:31-34, as most people don't. Notice how he made a covenant with both houses of Jacob: Judah and Israel. This covenant was made because of sin and division withing Israel. Judah had been in Babylon captive; the northern kingdom taken away into captivity and scattered throughout all nations.

Yahweh hasn't forsaken them, thus because of all past sins and transgressions (because they broke his covenant), he has decided to renew a covenant with them. Notice how, if you read, he only writes his Torah on the house of Israel's heart (as opposed to Judah). Why does he do this?

Because the northern kingdom specifically had turned to idolatry and had forsaken the Torah, thus broke "cursed is he that continues not in all the things that are written in the book of Torah to do them".

So what Yahweh was going to do is actually the OPPOSITE, of what you are saying. He's not saying they don't have to keep Torah because of some new standard set by the Spirit (that's not what the text says at all, anywhere). He's going to put his laws in their heart (house of Israel) so they can DO them this time, as opposed to BREAK them, which is the reason he had to make a new covenant with them in the first place. Then he says "and I will be their God and they shall be my people".

Why does he say this? Random statement? No. He told the house of Israel (as opposed to Judah) that they would not be his people:

Hosea 1:9 Then said Elohim, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God.
Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

Yahweh took away this curse through Messiah. This allows reconcilation between Judah and Israel, as is stated in the next verse:

Hosea 1:11 Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves One Head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel.

Has nothing to do with "the Spirit will teach you a new way of 'morals' and a 'new law' called the 'christ law' that tells you that christ 'fulfilled the law' so you do not have to keep it".

Jeremiah, along with Hebrews 8-10 is taken out of context, but if you'd like to, we could go over this verse by verse in a calmly manner, together.

Ezekiel 36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
Ezekiel 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

This brings us back to loving Yahweh and thus obeying what he ways as his set-apart nation.

One thing that has changed is the sin offering (Hebrews 10:18). Another thing that has changed is the access to the Holy of Holies (Hebrews 10:19) which is no longer reserved for just the High Priest, and no longer limited to once a year.

Wrong. We enter the holy place, not the holy of holies. If we were able to go into the holy place, we would not need Yahshua to be their for us. This is a lie that has been taught by many false teachers for a long time. Never does the scripture once say that we enter the holy of holies. If we could do the same thing the High Priest does, he wouldn't be High Priest.

Hebrews 10:25 is a new commandment to gather together, assemble.

Let's see:

Hebrews 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Nope. It says not to forsake it. This isn't a new commandment. He's so clearly referring to the moadim, the "appointed times". This is when all Israel gathers together to celebrate in all their dwellings with the feasts.

This is how we are prepared for Yahshua's coming ("the day approaching"). This is how we will be prepared. If we stay together and observe our appointed times, then we'll meet Yahshua at the appointed time, since I believe, as most do, his coming is set up and laid out and hinted at in the feast days.

Nowhere does Yahweh say anything about new laws.

John 13:34 (1 John 2:7-8); 1 Timothy 6:1-14; 1 John 3:23

John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Greek word here is kainos, which could be translated as "fresh". This is not new, as is obioviously seen from reading Leviticus 18:19.

Or, he could mean to remember to love, according to the Torah commandment, but do it as he says it's supposed to be done (which would be the way it was always supposed to be done).

So this doesn't prove a new law. Sorry.

1 John 2:7 Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.
1 John 2:8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.

Again, he says it isn't new. Yet then in the next verse he says it's new (fresh). Why? I believe, in context, he's he's referring to refreshed love for one another (both houses) in Messiah, forgetting all past historical hatred, strife, and vexation of one another.

So, no. This does not near prove a "new law". Do you think principles like "love" etc, were not known up until Messiah? Not to be mean, but is this what people believe?

1 Timothy 6:1-14 doesn't prove it either, if we read it, and I don't know how you pulled that from the text. Could you elaborate?

1 John 3:23 And this is His commandment, that we should believe the name of His Son, Yahshua the Messiah, and love one another, even as He gave command to us.

Again, this is not new. Believing in Messiah would be the fulfillment of a concept written in the scriptures, but it is not some "new" as in "different from Torah" form of "law". This just doesn't prove it.

 

[wavy]

Ephesians 3:1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, 2. If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward. 3. How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, 4. Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) 5. Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; 6. That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

If this doesn't PLAINLY STATE that grace DIDN'T exist for Gentiles PREVIOUS to the coming of Christ, His death and resurrection, I don't know what Paul is saying.

This is the mystery of the fullness of the nations/gentiles, which can be seen from reading my thread on Gentiles. And "dispensation" here is properly "administration" or "stewardship" in the Greek (just to clear up any thoughts of dispensationalism).

The rest of what you said concerning grace was just your opinion, and I frankly, don't feel like arguing about that. Anyway, on to your "law" change of subject.

Now, as to the law, the Bible PLAINLY states once again, that if one chooses to live, 'by the law', this person is bound by 'EVERY LETTER' of it. Not just the law that 'they choose', but ALL THE LAW. You guys seem to want to 'pick' which laws we are bound to. I say that once you start down this road, you make Christs' death void and barren of effect.

This is not what the bible says. You are speaking of this:

Galatians 5:3 And I testify again to every man being circumcised, that he is a debtor to do all Torah,

This is only after circumcision. The problem with these Galatians is that they were enslaving themselves through these "works of law" Jews through the Torah (not that the Torah itself is bondage). Faith and understanding has to come first before obedience to Torah. These Galatians were throwing Messiah right out of the picture. But faith comes first, as it did with Abraham, then circumcision, then the rest of Torah as you grow and learn. The EXACT same thing happened to Abraham. This is the correct order.

The problem was the Galatians, through the false dogmas of these certain Jews (operating under the spirit of Hagar), were trying to be justified by Torah first.

At that point all the teaching of law would be fulfilled through CHRIST. Christ defeated SIN, thereby fulfilling the law. Now we will live by ONE LAW. Do you know what that 'ONE LAW' is? ALL that has been offered by God is through GRACE and GRACE ALONE. Don't believe it? Then work yourself to death through the law to NO AVAIL. For without faith there IS NO GRACE.

Well, this is rightfully your opinion. I do not see it in scripture, however.

And THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE THE JEWS ARE STUCK TODAY. Jealous that they are no longer THE ONLY chosen of God, but the Gentiles too are 'the sons of God' through the Sacrifice of JESUS CHRIST. One who they continue to refuse until ALL ARE FORCED TO UNDERSTAND. Still stuck in 'their laws', still bound by the chains of sin through their denial of the One who could set them free.

And so is this. I respect your opinion, but I do think is way off the mark. The rest of what you said is the same. I decided to comment on a couple more statements you made:

For the law was NOT LOVE, but the path to it.

This is not in scripture. Love did not exist after Messiah. The commandment to love is in Torah.

Now what do you choose to follow: the laws of man or the love of God?

False dichotomy. Torah is Yahweh's, not man's. And in Torah is the commandment to love.

 

[SputnikBoy]

A good response, wavy, to Imagican's rather complex post. The problems we encounter here on the forum - and many of us are guilty of doing this - is that scripture and opinions and traditional beliefs come across in the same mix. Therefore it can be difficult to respond to the issue when one has to sift through the mix and separate the non-essential items in order to address the point.

While Imagican brings up some points worthy of note and some (probably opinions or from unbiblical sources) a little 'tricky' for me to address at this time, all I can do is to go by the Bible itself and its consistency in the area of 'grace' plus 'obedience'. In other words, one does not appear to negate the other. Actually, I find it rather arrogant of present-day Christians who seem to have taken it on themselves as having become 'God's chosen people' and are saying in effect, "You can shove the law and your obedience to it ...I don't need to obey anything ...I'm saved by grace!"

Have I missed the point or is this basically what they are saying? And, if so, is this attitude a fairly recent one?

 

[kwag_myers]

I think you may have missed the point in Jeremiah 31. What God is telling us is that the law will be in our hearts. Which is to say that each of us will be held to a standard set by the Holy Spirit, and not the written law. This is discussed in Hebrews chapters 8-10.

No, I think you have missed the point. I don't think you understand Jeremiah 31:31-34, as most people don't. Notice how he made a covenant with both houses of Jacob: Judah and Israel. This covenant was made because of sin and division withing Israel. Judah had been in Babylon captive; the northern kingdom taken away into captivity and scattered throughout all nations...

Once again, you reject the Holy Spirit because you think in terms of the flesh, cardinally! Not to mention the fact that you don't understand Jeremiah's ministry. But the real issue here is that you cannot accept the fact that the Old Testament is a physical example of spiritual truths.

As for taking things out of context, Hebrews 8:5-13 is very clear on the subject of a "NEW" covenant, and that the old one has been done away with.

One thing that has changed is the sin offering (Hebrews 10:18). Another thing that has changed is the access to the Holy of Holies (Hebrews 10:19) which is no longer reserved for just the High Priest, and no longer limited to once a year.

Wrong. We enter the holy place, not the holy of holies. If we were able to go into the holy place, we would not need Yahshua to be their for us. This is a lie that has been taught by many false teachers for a long time. Never does the scripture once say that we enter the holy of holies. If we could do the same thing the High Priest does, he wouldn't be High Priest.

Then why was the veil rent in two (Matthew 27:51)? To give us access to the Holy of Holies. How is it that we have access to the throne of grace (Hebrews 4:16) but not the mercy seat (Exodus 25:17)? That makes no sense. You teach a false religion, rejecting the saving grace of Jesus Christ, the spirit of adoption (Romans 8:15), and the Holy Spirit.

Hebrews 10:25 is a new commandment to gather together, assemble.

Let's see:

Hebrews 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.

Nope. It says not to forsake it. This isn't a new commandment. He's so clearly referring to the moadim, the "appointed times". This is when all Israel gathers together to celebrate in all their dwellings with the feasts.

So, unless you see the word "commandment" it doesn't count? If someone tells you not to do something, by definition, that is a commandment.

John 13:34 (1 John 2:7-8); 1 Timothy 6:1-14; 1 John 3:23

John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

Greek word here is kainos, which could be translated as "fresh". This is not new, as is obviously seen from reading Leviticus 18:19.

Or, he could mean to remember to love, according to the Torah commandment, but do it as he says it's supposed to be done (which would be the way it was always supposed to be done).

So this doesn't prove a new law. Sorry.

Strong's kainos:
1) new

a) as respects form

1) recently made, fresh, recent, unused, unworn

b) as respects substance

1) of a new kind, unprecedented, novel, uncommon, unheard of
For Synonyms see entry 5852

Appears 44 times and is always translated as "NEW" (even by Young's).

It is obvious that you teach a contrary doctrine, a false Jesus, and therefore, I choose to have nothing more to do with you.