You are not logged in.
Many today are still confused about the Old Covenant. They look upon the “words of the covenant”, in the reading of “Moses”, and mistakenly claim it to be the covenant itself. Thus they purport that the 10 Commandment is the “essence” of the Old Covenant and in so doing miss the entire point and true essence of that covenant.
In this “veiled” viewing, many today are yet Old Covenant minded though handling “New Covenant tenets”. For in that they still have not yet seen in Christ the fulfillment of the true “essence” of the Old Covenant, they still look for things (other than faith in Christ) they consider of “salvific” value in the New Covenant.
They find it difficult to discuss matters of faith and duty without insisting that they must be salvific. Thus when they hear of the teaching of the New Covenant Sabbath, for instance, they struggle to wrap their minds around the concept because, to them, it is a matter or salvific or not.
So what do the Scriptures teach as the true “essence” of the Old Covenant? Consider the following verses:
Ex. 19:1 In the third month after the Israelites left Egypt—on the very day—they came to the Desert of Sinai.
Ex. 19:2 After they set out from Rephidim, they entered the Desert of Sinai, and Israel camped there in the desert in front of the mountain.
Ex. 19:3 Then Moses went up to God, and the LORD called to him from the mountain and said, "This is what you are to say to the house of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel:
Ex. 19:4 'You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself.
Ex. 19:5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine,
Ex. 19:6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites."
Ex. 19:7 So Moses went back and summoned the elders of the people and set before them all the words the LORD had commanded him to speak.
Ex. 19:8 The people all responded together, "We will do everything the LORD has said." So Moses brought their answer back to the LORD.
Thus did the LORD initiate His covenant with the “house of Jacob” and the “people of Israel”. By entreating them on the virtue of His activity in bringing them out of Egyptian bondage, He establishes the nature of His covenant or “agreement” with them. These concise words (verse 5,6) sums up the “essence” of the Old Covenant. Jehovah’s stipulations were simple and direct. If you would love me and obey my words, you will be My people.
Deut. 30:11 11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach.
Deut. 30:12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?"
Deut. 30:13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?"
Deut. 30:14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.
This “essence” of the Old Covenant (loving obedience to all God’s commands) we also see at the renewal of the Covenant after the children of Israel spent 40 yrs in the wilderness and was about the enter the promised land.
Deut. 29:1 These are the terms of the covenant the LORD commanded Moses to make with the Israelites in Moab, in addition to the covenant he had made with them at Horeb.
Deut. 29:2 Moses summoned all the Israelites and said to them:
Your eyes have seen all that the LORD did in Egypt to Pharaoh, to all his officials and to all his land.
Deut. 29:3 With your own eyes you saw those great trials, those miraculous signs and great wonders.
Deut. 29:4 But to this day the LORD has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear.
Deut. 29:5 During the forty years that I led you through the desert, your clothes did not wear out, nor did the sandals on your feet.
Deut. 29:6 You ate no bread and drank no wine or other fermented drink. I did this so that you might know that I am the LORD your God.
(Read Deut. 29:7 – 30:14)
Deut. 30:15 See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction.
Deut. 30:16 For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.
Observe also how the LORD described the “terms of the covenant” when He used the prophet Jeremiah to rebuke the children of Israel for breaking the covenant.
Jer. 11:1 This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the LORD :
Jer. 11:2 "Listen to the terms of this covenant and tell them to the people of Judah and to those who live in Jerusalem.
Jer. 11:3 Tell them that this is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: 'Cursed is the man who does not obey the terms of this covenant-
Jer. 11:4 the terms I commanded your forefathers when I brought them out of Egypt, out of the iron-smelting furnace.' I said, 'Obey me and do everything I command you, and you will be my people, and I will be your God.
Jer. 11:5 Then I will fulfill the oath I swore to your forefathers, to give them a land flowing with milk and honey'-the land you possess today."
I answered, "Amen, LORD."
Hence the Scriptures are clear on the “essence” of the covenant between God and the children of Israel; love and obey Me, and you will be My people.
This then, is the true “essence” of what Christ had to “fulfill” on the sinner’s behalf. This also accords with the main point of the Old Covenant. Though it took a bloodied history, generations of stubborn rebellion, and curses and judgments that followed, the point was made clear: Mankind fails miserably of living up to this order of a covenant with God and are completely destitute of means to fulfill its claims upon him.
When therefore the time came to transition from the Old to New Covenant, it was not primarily God’s laws or the “terms” of the Old Covenant that was the problem, but the “people”.
Heb. 8:7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another.
Heb. 8:8 But God found fault WITH THE PEOPLE and said:
"The time is coming, declares the Lord,
when I will make a new covenant
with the house of Israel
and with the house of Judah.
Thus it is “Like Adam, they have broken the covenant” (Hos. 6:7) and in need of God’s Christ to come and rectify our fallen situation.
Moreover, when we read passages such as Deut. 4:13, which speaks of the 10 commandments as the covenant, it must be read with the whole picture of God’s covenant in mind. Thus when it says “He declared to you his covenant, the Ten Commandments, which he commanded you to follow and then wrote them on two stone tablets,” this must be understood in the context of the “essence” of the covenant of love and obedience to all of God’s “decrees and laws” . Extracted from this context, this text fails to encompass the true “essence” of the Old Covenant.
To suggest then, by the reading of this text that the 10 commandments are the “essence” of the Old Covenant, quite simply misses the mark.
Hence, must Hebrews 8:13 also be taken in this context or it loses its meaning and misses the main thrust of what the apostle is trying to say, namely, that the Old Covenant of “if you love and obey Me, you will be my people” has been replaced with “if you believe in My Christ, who loved Me and obeyed Me, then you will be my people”. This is the NEW covenant that governs the relationship between God and the body of New Covenant people, His “spiritual” house of Israel.
Let every lamp be burning bright, the darkest hour is nearing...
Offline
The Law of Moses was the essence of the Old Covenant. The Promise to Abraham never was fulfilled, but continued on with the church, it allowed for the adoption of Gentiles without circumcision or Sabbath keeping, the barrier that was broken down. I saw no where, Dexter, where you explain what that barrier between Jews and Gentiles was found in
Ephesians 2:14
For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility,
Offline
Sorry Bob, but you'll have to do way better than just saying the Law of Moses was the essence of the Old Covenant. Such a view, as was clearly stated, is immature and misses the thrust of what the Old Covenant was and the object lesson it provided, namely, mankind's failure to render to God "full" loving obedience to God, and thus dire need of a Christ.
Perhaps you should try again?
Let every lamp be burning bright, the darkest hour is nearing...
Offline
Dexter, I have supplied all kinds of sources, in a mature way, to you about my position. Please supply your sources of other professional scholars that agree with your position. Tom Norris does not count. This is not a negotiation session. Covenant Theology , Dispensationalism and New Covenant Theology have certain distinctives. Google it. See if you aren't Covenant in your Theology, or have to make some adjustments not to be an oddball, you and Tom with no one else in step behind either of you.
Offline
Dexter,
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
Mark Twain
Offline
The First Covenant
The problem arises in this passage from Hebrews:
1 “Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
2 “For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
3 “And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
4 “Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
5 “And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly” (Hebrews 9:1-5, KJV).
Please note that the word “covenant” is italicized in verse one. There is no Greek word in the original for this word in the sentence. Rather the Strong’s dictionary places the Greek word “echo” in this position, which refers only to the following word “had.” Whereas the word “covenant” seems a reasonable word to use, it is not the only possible word or even the best word. Some have suggested the word “dispensation” as being more accurate. ...
To Adam and Eve were given the main core of the covenant (Genesis 3:15). Jesus, Redeemer of mankind would crush the serpent’s head and destroy sin and sinners. He would do this by suffering, even by His death on the cross. Humanity were given an enmity against evil, the law written on their hearts, and were “bought back” (1 Corinthians 6:20) and given another probation whereby they might choose to serve Jesus.
It is from this core of the covenant that we receive all the blessings of God and have hope for the future. Sacrifices were begun just after Adam sinned (Genesis 4:2-4). A lamb was slain to illustrate the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross to pay the penalty for man’s sin. Were these sacrifices a part of the covenant? The Bible does not say that it was.
Animal sacrifices were specifically the part of the ceremonial law that was fulfilled and came to an end at Calvary. A human priesthood and tabernacle services were not established until Sinai. And they were not made effective until Calvary (Hebrews 9:15). These continued as heavenly services by Jesus Christ, the heavenly High Priest. The promise of land and children to Abraham were continued with the New Earth as the Promised Land, and the multitudes of people converted as the children of Abraham.
By these the promises of the covenant were fulfilled, had no more purpose, and came to an end. Note also that the sacrifices and the sanctuary services, while pointing forward to heavenly realities, were still activities carried out by human beings. And man cannot effect his own salvation even by doing sacrifices and sanctuary services. As an illustration of the plan of salvation they served the purposes of God. Nothing more was needed of these exercises and they were not part of the covenant.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
The Abrahamic Covenant Presented to Israel
The covenant of God was formed before creation in a council of the Godhead (see articles #2.0 and 2.1). In the foreknowledge of God, He knew that men would sin. Yet the concept of freedom was so important to God that He gave angels and men free will. God would take responsibility for His creation, and would Himself meet the penalty if men should sin.
When Adam and Eve sinned, before the sun set that day, God brought them under the covenant provisions. It was an announcement of good news. The covenant was made with Noah before and after the flood to save the human race and to provide a means for Messiah to come. Then as world population increased God chose Abraham to be the father of the nation through whom Messiah would come.
Abraham was tested for his faith. He was given the covenant on seven different occasions, with promises of land and children. Abraham, knowing his human weakness and the holiness of God, bowed and accepted His grace (Genesis 15:6). The Abrahamic covenant was repeated with Isaac, Jacob, Moses at the burning bush, and to Israel twice when Moses and Aaron returned to confront Pharaoh.
At Sinai, Israel now a nation, was again officially given the Abrahamic covenant (Exodus 19:4-6). What was given to Abraham applied to all his descendants. This covenant was confirmed by Christ at Calvary, and was given to the church as the “New Covenant in My blood” by Jesus Himself.(1)
The covenant as presented Exodus 19:4-6 contained wonderful promises. “Ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people ... ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation” (Exodus 19:5,6). This was made possible by the grace and power that God showed in delivering them from the Egyptians (Exodus 19:4).
Last edited by hfsturges (01-24-11 7:00 pm)
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Which is the Everlasting Covenant, Hubb:
Genesis 9:16- The Rainbow
Genesis 17:7 - Isaac
Genesis 17:13 - Circumcision
Genesis 17:19 -firstborn of a cow, a sheep or a goat;
Numbers 18:19- firstborn of a cow, a sheep or a goat
Isaiah 24:5 How can an everlasting covenant be broken
The word Everlasting, you need to study it more. Everlasting has conditions sometimes and not others. Discernment is required to decipher which is which.
The Bible refers to
1. The Promise to Abraham
2. The Old Covenant
3. The New Covenant
Everlasting has to be studied in it's proper contest to determine if conditional or non-conditional.
Offline
Covenants that have been fulfilled are no longer valid. Christ fulfilled all the requirement of the Covenant made with the Israelites. We are now living under the New Covenant, brought in by His death.
The covenant made with Abraham for circumcision was to be an "everlasting" one, yet did the apostles have the blessing of God to abrogate it?
When a new covenant takes place, the old one is no longer valid, because the new one has better promises.
Offline
Bob,
In Genesis 9 the rainbow is given as a “token” of the covenant. As God “looks upon it” He will remember the “everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh.” The bow is NOT the covenant.
Genesis 17:7 promises the covenant to be renewed with Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and the nation of Israel, and by extension to the Christian church. These are all the “seed of Abraham” in Christ (Galatians 3:29). The covenant was renewed specifically to Isaac in Genesis 26:3-5.
Genesis 17:10 and 13 can be a little confusing. This requires some discussion. Circumcision is a token of the covenant, NOT the covenant!
“This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised” (Genesis 17:10).
“He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant” (Genesis 17:13).
Verse ten apparently says that circumcision IS the covenant. The problem is that the covenant given to Abraham is the everlasting covenant, and in the New Testament circumcision was discontinued as unnecessary for Christians (Acts 15:5-29; Galatians 2:3-5; 5:26; Romans 2:28, 29). Let us look at verse ten carefully:
“This is my covenant” refers to the everlasting covenant that had just been given to Abraham in the preceding verses (Genesis 17:1-9). This was the covenant of God formed before creation of this earth. Circumcision was a “token of the covenant” (Gen 17:11). There are times where the sign of a covenant becomes so closely associated with the covenant that the sign is called “the covenant.” This is a possibility.
In ancient times the Bible was written without punctuation or divisions between words OR verses! All these were added later, using the best knowledge of the language available. Genesis 17:10 might best be read with the first phrase being the conclusion of the discussion of the everlasting covenant in verses one to nine.
10 “This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you, and thy seed after thee;”
The second half of this verse begins a new subject, “Every man child among you shall be circumcised.” This second half naturally fits with the three verses that follow.
But there is more: The last part of Genesis 17:13, “and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant” offers more problems. “My covenant” is a term used in the Bible 51 times but never referring to circumcision. It is reasonable to see this referring again to the everlasting covenant of Genesis 17:1-9. “Shall be in your flesh” is a direct reference to circumcision. It would be more than a mental concept. It would be a physical personal reminder of a man’s covenant relationship with God.
“Everlasting covenant” is repeated in the Bible 16 times but never refers to circumcision. It is here reasonable to see circumcision as a “token” of the everlasting covenant. As some have said, circumcision is the sign of the everlasting covenant, but NOT the everlasting sign of the covenant!
Genesis 17:19 and Numbers 18:19 have nothing to do with the firstborn of animals.
(Isaiah 24:5) The everlasting covenant made between Father and Son cannot be broken. This covenant was given also to men. It is only the relationship between man and God that can be broken by the sins of men (Isaiah 59:2). This happened repeatedly when Israel went into idolatry.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Elaine,
Your comment reflects a common misunderstanding, even among Adventists. If you can be more clear in what you believe, and focus on one point you want me to respond to, I will be glad to do it.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Hubb, nice try but it was circumcision that was to be everlasting in the flesh. It never was everlasting because a New Covenant came that did not require circumcision but baptism and the Lords Supper. Because the people failed in their unbeliet. The Old Covenant was conditional and became disconnected at the Cross, when the New Covenant was ushered in, and could be because of the conditionality of the Old Covenant. Abraham's Promise was unconditional, and allowed the adiption of us Gentiles into the New Covenant.
Offline
A covenant lasts only as long as the two signators have fulfilled, or negated the covenant.
The Isarelites did not fulfill the covenant made with God so with Christ's coming it became invalid, which is explained numerously in the NT.
How do you explain the New Covenant, frequently spoken of, even in the OT, as only being a continuation of the Old? Why does the writer of Hebrews say that had the first covenant been faultless there would have been
no need for a newer and better covenant to replace the old one?
"It will not be a covenant like the one I made with their ancestors....No, this is the covenant I will make with the House of Israel....I will put my laws into their minds and write them on their hearts. SPEAKING OF A NEW COVENANT, HE IMPLIES THAT THE FIRST ONE IS ALREADY OLD, NOW ANYTHING OLD ONLY GET MORE ANTIQUATED UNTIL IN THE END IT DISAPEARS."
Circumcision was called an "everlasting covenant" yet it was done away with for the Gentile Christians, and the Gentile Christians were never instructed to observe the Judaic laws. God was the mediator of the covenants made with the Israelites; Jesus is the Mediator of the new covenant.
"If you allow yourselves to be circumcised (this was directed specifically to the Gentiles), Christ will be of no benefit to you at all. Everyone who accepts circumcision is obliged to keep the whole Law. But if you do look to the Law to make you justified, then you have separated yoursleves from Christ....since in Christ Jesus whether you are circumcised or not makes no difference--what matters is faith that makes its power felt through love." What is the law? "The whole of the Law is summarised in a single command: LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."
The whole reason for the controversy over having the Gentiles submit to circumcision, because they were not allowed, even condemned, for attempting to obey the Law unless they were first circumcised--it was the entrance sign into the Jewish community, under pain of death if not obeyed. This was established at the first Passover (Ex. 12:43,44,48) "No foreigner is to eat of it; but every man's slave purchased with money, AFTER YOU HAVE CIRCUMCISED HIM, then he may ear of it....if a stranger sojourns with you and celebrates the Passover to the Lord, let all his males be circumcised, and THEN let him come to celebrate it....But no uncircumcised person may eat of it."
The priests were very jealously protective of the Law, only allowing a circumcised man to obey it and live by the Judaic system. Later, the rabbis, who were the interpreters of the Law, condemened any non-Jew to death for attempting to observe its laws!
This Sinatic covenant was NOT MADE with the Israelite father: "The Lord DID NOT make this covenant with our fathers, but with US, with all those of US alive here today." The Jew could be stoned for disobeying the Fourth Commandement; this never applied to the foreigners living around them, but only to those with whom the covenant had been made.
Offline
Elaine,
The Everlasting covenant between Father and Son is eternal. This is in line with the new covenant. On Calvary, Jesus confirmed the everlasting covenant, the new covenant, and the Abrahamic covenant. This may be a little confusing to you, but the everlasting and new covenants are the same. When God made a covenant with Abraham, the God-man agreement pointed to the everlasting / new covenant already formed.
As an agreement between God and man, the Abrahamic covenant included all Abraham's descendants -- Isaac, Jacob, Moses, the elders of Israel when Moses conferred with them before approaching Pharaoh, and at Sinai in the covenant given in Exodus 19:4-6. It was this Abrahamic covenant that was confirmed by Christ on Calvary.
Israel then made self-confident promises "all that the Lord hath spoken we will do." This covenant was ratified by a sacrifice. While Moses was in the mountain for 40+ days, the Israelites pressured Aaron to make a golden calf, and they had a heathen festival -- thinking for them to return to Egypt! This covenant was broken, abrogated, and ineffectual from that time forward. It is known as the "historical old covenant."
The new covenant is entirely on a different basis than the old covenant. Ellen White speaks of the new covenant being given to Adam and Eve, and to Abraham, and being the covenant ratified on the cross. As I mentioned, the new covenant and the everlasting covenant are the same.
About circumcision, I wrote about this 2-3 days ago. According to Acts 15, circumcision was no longer needed to belong to the church or to be a Christian.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Bob,
Obviously circumcision was done away as a requirement after the cross. We are not told as much about circumcision as we might like, but in my opinion, circumcision was a ritual to remind the Jews to keep themselves and their families pure in preparation for the coming Messiah. After Jesus came, this requirement was no longer necessary.
As I read Genesis 17 and the establishment of circumcision as a requirement for the Jews, carefully reading the syntax does not say that circumcision was to be "everlasting." It was not the covenant either. It was the token of the covenant.
The historical old covenant of human promises lasted just 46 days. It was abrogated by the rebellious festival at the base of Sinai. It was the Abrahamic covenant that was ratified at Calvary. However there was a deeply laid old covenant mindset that provided the basis for Jesus to be rejected and crucified, and for the problems of the Jewish Christians to lay aside their dependence on the ceremonial law.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
The People Promise
God asked for a response. Through His offer of grace, “Now therefore, if ye will obey (hear) my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ...” God would fulfill the wonderful promises of the covenant (Exodus 19:5).
The people had lived in Egypt proper for 215 years. They had lived in the midst of rampant idolatry, in a sophisticated heathen society. They were persecuted and enslaved by the Egyptians. They had forgotten the covenant of Abraham and had adopted some of the attitudes of the Egyptians. Knowing this, God asked them to respond to the covenant. In asking them to “obey,” the Hebrew word is “shama” for “hear or hearken.” They must hear what God said, meditate on what He said, and accept His grace to change their lives.
God asked them to remember their protection from the plagues of Egypt, their firstborn did not die, God opened a way for them through the Red Sea. On their journey He gave them water from the rock and manna every day. There was the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night. He protected them from marauding tribes. In these things the people saw His power to deliver, and experienced His love and grace.
In their response the people said: “All that the Lord hath spoken we will do” (Exodus 19:8). They repeated this statement twice more in the ratification ceremony: “All the words which the Lord hath said will we do” (24:3) and “all that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient” (24:7). They were enthusiastic, self-confident and presumptuous in “wanting to do their part.” They showed a willingness to “do it all themselves” and to bypass the offered grace of God. In this they were doomed to failure.
They meant well and in their promises dedicated themselves to obey. God was pleased with their words as grace cannot be effective in the life without the decision and consent of each person. But God was disappointed in their lack of faith.
“And the LORD heard the voice of your words, when ye spake unto me; and the LORD said unto me, I have heard the voice of the words of this people, which they have spoken unto thee: they have well said all that they have spoken.
“O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever” (Deuteronomy 5:28-29, KJV)!
Moses had communed with God after the ten commandment law was given. He was given further instructions of the civil law (Exodus 20-23) which Moses wrote in a book and read to the people. The terms of the Old Covenant included:
“Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
“Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
“But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries.
“For mine Angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: and I will cut them off.
28 “And I will send hornets before thee, which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite, from before thee” (Exodus 23:20-23, 28, KJV).
The people gave a faulty response to the covenant of God. God accepted their promises as He knew they could learn only by experience. In the above passage, God made it clear that there was no pardon for their transgressions if they depended on their own promises. The people apparently did not see this and in the following ratification ceremony, said nothing about the grace of God or even of the promises that God had given. This was the historical Old Covenant.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Hubb said:
The Everlasting covenant between Father and Son is eternal.
I know that EGW talks in a similar manner, but biblically it is
1. Abrahamic Promise
2. Old Covenant
3. New Covenant
There are other covenants but those three are the salvific ones that are mentioned over and over in the NT.
Last edited by bob_2 (01-28-11 12:50 am)
Offline
Hubb said on his own forum:
8. Did Jesus End the Old Covenant?
Did Jesus end the old covenant by His sacrifice, and institute a new covenant? Did "to confirm" the covenant mean to end it? No!
Did Jesus institute the inoperative "new covenant" at that time, thus ending the old covenant? Having evidence that the covenant of grace had been given to Adam and Eve and to Abraham in the past introduces a problem if a person believes that the Old covenant was in force until ended by Jesus at Calvary. To believe that the Old Covenant was instituted at Sinai and continued to the Cross poses a special problem for Adventists. The ten commandment law was clearly associated with the Sinai covenant, even called “the covenant.”
To say the Old Covenant was ended at the Cross raises the question as to what happened to the ten commandments. There is evidence that the ten commandment law is the law of God for all eternity, but this evidence is largely implied in the patriarchal age. In my opinion, there is strong evidence that God has just one everlasting covenant which has been renewed many times, and finally ratified by Jesus at the Cross. This covenant continues into the New Earth when the covenant blessing is given,
“And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God” (Revelation 21:3).
http://www.everlastingcovenant.com/arti … d_Covenant
I am glad that Hubb finally realizes the problem if the Old Covenant is fulfilled by Christ, then what of the Ten Commandments and the Sabbath, the SDAs hold onto so firmly which goes away with the Old Covenant. Its refreshing to realize that Hubb recognizes that.
Last edited by bob_2 (01-28-11 1:16 am)
Offline
Bob,
You are getting close. I think it is a misunderstanding to think that God made many covenants with men.
There are a number of verses that speak of Jesus the Lamb of God from the foundation of the world, also about the mystery that was revealed by Christ. Many verses speak of Christ who came to do the will of the Father -- a pre-arranged will. From these we understand that a covenant was made between Father and Son before creation, and made effectual after Adam sinned. This is the Everlasting Covenant of God.
The New Covenant is characterized by "writing the law on their hearts". This was done for Adam and Eve when God said He would "put enmity between thee (the serpent) and the woman and between thy seed and her seed." The new covenant was also given to Abraham in that Abraham always promptly obeyed God, and kept His commandments (Genesis 26:4,5).
The Abrahamic covenant extended to all his descendants -- Isaac, Jacob, Moses at the burning bush, and to Israel when Moses returned from Midian, and to Israel at Sinai. The Abrahamic covenant is also the covenant under which the Christian Church is put. The Abrahamic covenant was made up of the everlasting covenant of God on God's part, and the belief and faith of Abraham on his part. On the cross of Calvary the Everlasting Covenant, the New Covenant, and the Abrahamic Covenant were all confirmed. this is because on God's part they were all the same.
The Old Covenant was entirely different. this is what I am posting on at this time.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
The Response of Faith
God requires faith, consent to the work of grace, a decision to do what is right, and a surrender to His will (Hebrews 11:6). All this is needed. Yet there is danger that even this is a work that we do of ourselves. Something even that we will take pride in as what WE have done to effect our salvation. How do we come to Christ unless we take these steps? They were to do as Abraham did, they must have heart felt belief, faith in God, and consent to the work of grace (Genesis 15:6).
The prayer that God always hears is the cry for help. In the temple one day, a publican standing afar off “smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner” (Luke 18:13). In this brief view, we find a man who recognized his need, recognized his inability to help himself, and fell upon the strength of God for the help he needed.
In answering that prayer, God has all that he requires, and He will give all the help that is needed. In gratitude men can take no pride in what they have done, and will thank God for what He has done. This is the response that God looked for from the men of Israel in that day.
It was this response that God was looking for when He presented the covenant at Sinai.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Hubb said:
This is the Everlasting Covenant of God.
This seems like Tom's Reformed Sabbath. Both of you declare terms not used in the Bible as the two of you do. At least, Hubb, you haven't started telling people their minds are ruined because they disagree with you.
Offline
Bob,
The Term "Everlasting Covenant" IS a Biblical term. Look it up in your concordance. It is used several times in Genesis 17, for instance. If you object to this term, I have nothing to urge. Consider John 3:16 and John 10:17,18. There are a number of other verses detailing that Jesus coming to this earth was a planned event, and many indicate that the Father was part of that plan.
Daniel 9:27 speaks of Messiah "confirm the covenant" with many for one week. What covenant was that? for one, it was the Abrahamic covenant; but didn't the Abrahamic covenant involve the Father and the Son in the incarnation and sacrifice on Calvary? I believe a study of Hebrews would show the plan made in heaven by the Father and Son. See especially Hebrews 10:5-9.
As for terms, we also use "Plan of Salvation" and "everlasting gospel" for the same event. The term "everlasting covenant" comes not that we have the term specifically applied, but because we have the elements of a covenant describing what happened before Creation in council of the Godhead.
Hubert F. Sturges
www.theeverlastingcovenant.com
Offline
Heb: 10:9:
"Behold I have come to do thy will. HE TAKES AWAY THE FIRST IN ORDER TO ESTABLILISH THE SECOND.'
Is the writer speaking of the second covenant?
Heb: 8:7-9:
"For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion sought for a second, for finding fault with them, He says: 'Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, when I will effect a New Covenant....Not like the covenant which I made with their fathers."
The first covenant has been replaced with the New Covenant which is now obsolete.
Offline
That is the point, everlasting circucision never was. In Heb 8:13 the old is eliminated for the New Covenant. EGW speaks your way, but the Bible differently.
Last edited by bob_2 (01-29-11 9:21 am)
Offline
Dan: 9:27:
"And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, bu in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacxrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is pured out on the one who makes desolate."
In the first verses of chapter 9, "Daniel was perusing the scriptures, counting over the number of yars--as revealed by Yahweh to the prophet Jeremiah--that were to pass before the successive devastations of Jerusalem would come to an end, namely seventy years."
This is emphatically and specifically referring to the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. that to misappropriate it is to ignore the history of Jerusalem and the temple which was destroyed then. Only Adventists have interpreted this to mean thousands of years afterward when the plain reading fits exactly the historic fall of Jerusalem and the temple. To ignore history is to be totally unmindful of it.
Offline