The Abrahamic Covenant:

[H. Richard]

I write this as a study of what the Abrahamic covenant is. Some think that the law was not a part of this covenant. I intend to show they are wrong.

Gal 3:16-19
16 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, "And to seeds," as of many, but as of one, "And to your Seed," who is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.
18 For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. (NKJ)

In the above notice who the promise was made to. It was made only to Abraham and Jesus.

Promises = a covenant.

In verse Gal 3:16 we see Jesus as the SEED (one). The promise of righteousness by faith was made to Abraham AND HIS SEED (Jesus), NOT SEEDS (THE JEWS). It was not made to SEEDS (plural). And there were more promises made to Abraham SEEDS (plural). We see in Gen 22:17. There were additional promises made about Abraham's seeds (descendants; plural = the Jews) and they will rule over the nations of the earth. ---- Let me say it again, the promise of righteousness by belief (faith) was ONLY MADE TO ABRAHAM AND HIS SEED, Jesus. So why is it said that it was made to all the people at that time?

Gen 22:17
17 "blessing I will bless you, and in multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies. (NKJ)

Please note; If you will look at Gal 3:19 above we see that something was ADDED to the covenant. It became a part of the Abrahamic covenant. It did not annul the promise of Jesus but it was added to the covenant.

Paul said: Rom 15:8
8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises (plural) made unto the fathers: (KJV)

The promises (plural) made to the fathers are a covenant. Jesus came to confirm/fulfill all

that was written of Him in the O.T. His mission was to fulfill ALL of the promises including the laws. His mission was to the Jews, not to the Gentiles.

Jesus offered to fulfill the covenant by setting up His kingdom on earth (the kingdom of heaven). However, as we all know, the Jews rejected Him.

A person might ask, how did He fulfill the Law; He fulfilled it by shedding His blood on a cross as payment for all the sins of the world. People are no longer judged for their sins of the flesh, they are all paid for. The only sin that condemns a person in this world today is the sin of un-belief; to not believe that His shed blood on the cross has paid for their sins of the flesh. If a person doesn’t believe it then they don’t believe the promises of God’s grace poured out on the cross. Under the Law of Moses a person could be stoned to death for breaking the Law. Of how much greater will be the condemnation of those that refuse to accept the shed blood of Jesus as their salvation.

 

[justbyfaith]

I believe that you are speaking of the matter of the forgiveness of sins.

There is also the matter of whether we are spiritually alive or dead.

If we are spiritually alive, then we will consistently walk according to the Spirit and not after the flesh:

Rom 8:12, Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
Rom 8:13, For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
Rom 8:14, For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

 

[Davy]

I write this as a study of what the Abrahamic covenant is. Some think that the law was not a part of this covenant. I intend to show they are wrong.

Gal 3:16-19
16 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, "And to seeds," as of many, but as of one, "And to your Seed," who is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.
18 For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. (NKJ)

In the above notice who the promise was made to. It was made only to Abraham and Jesus.

That is not what Paul was teaching there about God's promises. THE... "promise" he was speaking of that Abraham believed, and it was counted to Abraham as righteousness, was The Gospel by Faith. Paul is making a DISTINCTION there between Faith which was first, and the law.

Gal 3:5-7
5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
KJV

Paul starts off right in the beginning in Gal.3 about this difference between Abraham's Faith vs. the law, and you screwed... it up! The Promise by Faith is... The Gospel that Paul was speaking of regarding Abraham's Faith! It is not only to Israel, but to all nations! In the beginning under the Old Covenant times, it was only for Israel and strangers living among Israel, but when Jesus came to fulfill it on His cross, the Promise went to all nations.

Gal 3:8-9
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
KJV

Gal 3:14
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
KJV

Gal 3:26-29
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
KJV


By your ignorance of saying that promise by Faith was part of the law, you make a mockery of The Gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

[Davy]

I believe that you are speaking of the matter of the forgiveness of sins.

There is also the matter of whether we are spiritually alive or dead.

If we are spiritually alive, then we will consistently walk according to the Spirit and not after the flesh:

Rom 8:12, Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
Rom 8:13, For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
Rom 8:14, For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Actually, he is blinded because of following the false doctrine that Paul had a different gospel than the other Apostles, even though Paul was preaching about Abraham's Faith on The Gospel of Jesus Christ. I've conversed with him on other forums, and he pushes the same ideas that another here named @Doug does.

The doctrine they are following is called Hyper-Dispensationalism. It began in the 1800's with John Darby's Dispensationalism and E.W. Bullinger's later version and was modernized by Stam, O'Hair, Baker, et al.

 

[justbyfaith]

Actually, he is blinded because of following the false doctrine that Paul had a different gospel than the other Apostles, even though Paul was preaching about Abraham's Faith on The Gospel of Jesus Christ. I've conversed with him on other forums, and he pushes the same ideas that another here named @Doug does.

The doctrine they are following is called Hyper-Dispensationalism. It began in the 1800's with John Darby's Dispensationalism and E.W. Bullinger's later version and was modernized by Stam, O'Hair, Baker, et al.

@Davy, what do you think of the following scripture?

Gal 2:7, But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Gal 2:8, (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles: )

It seems to me that here Paul is speaking of two different gospels; one to the uncircumcision (Paul's gospel) and the other to the circumcision (what was preached by Jesus and the other apostles).

It seems to me that even in this, the gospel to the circumcision is not the gospel that was unto condemnation spoken of in Galatians 1:6-9; Jesus and the other apostles were in fact preaching a valid gospel.

A few scriptures to ponder:

Rom 15:8, Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

Col 4:11, And Jesus, which is called Justus, who are of the circumcision. These only are my fellowworkers unto the kingdom of God, which have been a comfort unto me.

Paul was not completely against the gospel to the circumcision throughout his whole lifetime. He considered that Jesus Himself was a minister of the circumcision. And certain people in Paul's life, who preached the gospel of the circumcision, turned out to be of comfort to Paul in certain situations where he needed comfort.

I would say by this that these "two gospels" were a source of division in the body of Christ for a season; but that unity between the doctrines developed over time.

 

[CoreIssue]

My one comment is seed is both singular and plural depending on usage.

 

[Enoch111]

Some think that the law was not a part of this covenant. I intend to show they are wrong.

The Law was NOT a part of the Abrahamic Covenant. When Gal 3:19 says it was "added" it means that it was a necessary part of God's dealings with mankind, so that the whole world would become guilty before God.

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. (Rom 3:19)

For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. (Rom 5:13,14)

What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions... (Gal 3:19)

So once again you are concocting your own theology and promoting false beliefs.

 

[H. Richard]

My one comment is seed is both singular and plural depending on usage.

What about the usage here? Isn't it defined by the usage in Gal 3;6?

H. Richard, post: 566811, member: 6940"
Gal. 3:16 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, "And to seeds," as of many, but as of one, "And to your Seed," who is Christ.

THESES WORDS ARE IN THE SCRIPTURE.

 

[CoreIssue]

What about the usage here? Isn't it defined by the usage in Gal 3;6?

H. Richard, post: 566811, member: 6940"
Gal. 3:16 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, "And to seeds," as of many, but as of one, "And to your Seed," who is Christ.

THESES WORDS ARE IN THE SCRIPTURE.

God made a covenant with Abraham that was in part fulfilled by Jesus.

Jesus did not exist when the covenant was made.

The land part of the covenant is fulfilled via Israel.

The Galatians part was dealing with the Gentiles and the church.

The kingship part via the Davidic covenant. Jesus being the lineage of David.

Abrahamic included many nations, not through Jesus.

The Abrahamic is complex.

You have to keep each part in context.

Galatians was dealing with the Gentiles and the church part of the covenant.

 

[justbyfaith]

Jesus did not exist when the covenant was made.

Oh yes He did.

Not only did He pre-exist as the Father; but when He rose from the dead He rose to fill all things, and therefore His existence was again outside of time. Therefore both the Father and the Son (both of them Jesus Christ) existed when the covenant was made.

 

[Davy]

@Davy, what do you think of the following scripture?

Gal 2:7, But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Gal 2:8, (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles: )

It seems to me that here Paul is speaking of two different gospels; one to the uncircumcision (Paul's gospel) and the other to the circumcision (what was preached by Jesus and the other apostles).

It seems to me that even in this, the gospel to the circumcision is not the gospel that was unto condemnation spoken of in Galatians 1:6-9; Jesus and the other apostles were in fact preaching a valid gospel.

That is a favorite Scripture they use, but it doesn't fit their doctrine because Paul was not speaking of two different gospels, but two different administrations of the same Gospel of Jesus Christ. Paul made it more clear in parenthesis. Those on Hyper-dispensatioinalism omit what Paul said in parenthesis with the distinction of "apostleship" and not two different gospels.

The HPD doctrine (Hyper-Dispensationalism) doctrine goes so far as to proclaim that only Paul's Epistles are applicable to Gentiles. So they omit even the prophecies for the end of this world our Lord Jesus gave all His Church like in His Olivet discourse, and which Apostle Paul also warned about, like in 2 Cor.11, 2 Thess.2, 1 Thess.5, etc. It's a great... doctrine of men if you want to stay ignorant and deceived of the signs of the end which our Lord Jesus and Paul also gave Christ's Church for the end of this world. The devil is laughing at those sucked into the doctrine.

A few scriptures to ponder:

Rom 15:8, Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

Col 4:11, And Jesus, which is called Justus, who are of the circumcision. These only are my fellowworkers unto the kingdom of God, which have been a comfort unto me.

Paul was not completely against the gospel to the circumcision throughout his whole lifetime. He considered that Jesus Himself was a minister of the circumcision. And certain people in Paul's life, who preached the gospel of the circumcision, turned out to be of comfort to Paul in certain situations where he needed comfort.

I would say by this that these "two gospels" were a source of division in the body of Christ for a season; but that unity between the doctrines developed over time.

You cannot just pull out a single verse out of context of the whole chapter, and then apply outside ideas to it. That's what HPD does, but it is wrong to do that.


The Real Romans 15 Message:

Rom 15:4-12
4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.
5 Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus:
6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
7 Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God.
8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:
9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy; as it is written, 'For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.'
10 And again He saith, 'Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with His people.
11 And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud Him, all ye people.
12 And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in Him shall the Gentiles trust.
KJV

You quoted verse 8 above and tried to separate it from that Scripture context with different Gospel messages. That is not at all what Paul's context is there. It is different that what you suggest when you stick to the flow of those verses in context. And the Message is that even though Jesus came to confirm God's Promises to faithful Israel, believing Israel and believing Gentiles are to be ONE, and be of "one mind" in Christ Jesus, not two separate bodies.

With the Col.4:11 example, Paul is simply speaking of receiving brethren that are called in The Gospel, with Jesus and Justus simply Paul's fellowworkers. The fact that Paul called them "fellowworkers unto the kingdom of God" doesn't mean a separate kingdom than what believing Gentiles will have. If that were so then it would contradict what Paul said about Gentiles becoming nigh to the Promises and covenants to Israel as part of the "commonwealth of Israel" (Eph.2).

 

[justbyfaith]

You cannot just pull out a single verse out of context of the whole chapter, and then apply outside ideas to it.

I really don't think that I did that.

Also, it should be clear from 1 Corinthians 2:13 (kjv) that we compare scripture with scripture to obtain the teaching of the Holy Ghost. Therefore in interpreting scripture, it is not only the immediate context that matters; but the topical context is also of importance.

1Co 2:13, Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

 

[Davy]

I really don't think that I did that.

Also, it should be clear from 1 Corinthians 2:13 (kjv) that we compare scripture with scripture to obtain the teaching of the Holy Ghost. Therefore in interpreting scripture, it is not only the immediate context that matters; but the topical context is also of importance.
....

I hear you saying that, but I don't see you doing it.

What I showed by including more Scripture from that single Romans 15:8 verse you quoted is that Paul's Message is just the OPPOSITE of what you said.

 

[justbyfaith]

What I showed by including more Scripture from that single Romans 15:8 verse you quoted is that Paul's Message is just the OPPOSITE of what you said.

I don't see that; you are going to have to make that more clear.

I think that the word "And" at the beginning of verse 9 says it all.

Context never nullifies or makes opposite the plain meaning of every verse.

 

[justbyfaith]

I hear you saying that, but I don't see you doing it.

I suppose that there are some who think that in order to be considered a Christian on Christian forums, that their demeanor needs to be abrasive.

I would say that the opposite demeanor would be true of real believers in the Lord.

 

[Davy]

I don't see that; you are going to have to make that more clear.

I think that the word "And" at the beginning of verse 9 says it all.

Context never nullifies or makes opposite the plain meaning of every verse.

Well, let's go over it line by line then.

What is very possible, and happens quite a bit, is that some preachers will pull a single verse out of the context of the flow of other verses it is with, and teach something totally different. The Luke 17 matter of the two in the field with the first one taken is taught in opposite fashion all the time by certain Church organizations. They base a whole rapture doctrine on it, when it is not about Christ's gathering His Church at all. It's about being deceived and being spiritually 'taken' by the devil's servants which are represented by the symbolic eagles. This is why God wants us to study His Word line upon line, so we will know when some man tries to preach something else (Isa.28).

Rom 15:3-17
3 For even Christ pleased not Himself; but, as it is written, 'The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.'
4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

Paul of course is speaking to Romans, and those no doubt included scattered Israelites along with Gentiles. He is addressing Christ's Church. He is speaking of the Old Testament writings that were "written aforetime for our learning". We are to study all of God's Word, not just fragments. Knowing what the Scriptures says is where that comfort is from he speaks of.


5 Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus:
6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
7 Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God.

Paul's Message is for us, Christ's Church, to be joined together as one body, to receive one another as brethren and sisters. In other words, this is opposite of any separateness idea.


8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:
9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.
10 And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people.
11 And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people.
12 And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust.

All those 9-12 verses go with the subject of that 8th verse. Can't just single out that 8th verse by itself, because Paul is giving examples in the 9-12 verses of how... he means that 8th verse.

And it's about our Lord Jesus coming to fulfill the prophecies given to Israel which includes Salvation to the Gentiles. Paul is even quoting from the Old Testament prophets about that Salvation to the Gentiles. Every above phrase in green is Paul quoting from the OT prophets about Christ's Salvation to the Gentiles.

Some preachers simply are not that well studied in the Old Testament Books. Among some circles there is a fallacy belief that all the Old Testament Books have been fulfilled, so they don't cover them much, just a base touch of history and that's about it. But in reality, there still is much prophecy in the OT that still has not yet come to pass today, even though a lot of Apostle Paul's teaching is of how many of those OT passages were fulfilled (like the above in green).

Thus Christ's Salvation to the Gentiles is included in the OT Books of the prophets. What was not know then was how it would come; how it would happen. But it was always written in the prophets first, which is where Paul is teaching from.

 

[justbyfaith]

Hello @Davy,

I was certainly not saying that Jesus didn't come to save the Gentiles!

My understanding is that there is no scripture verse that will truly contradict any other scripture verse.

Romans 15:8;

and Romans 15:9-12;

are obviously talking about two different and separate things.

Your answer does not satisfy me concerning what I said in post #5 above (The Abrahamic Covenant:), about Galatians 2:7-8.

There is obviously a gospel to the uncircumcision and also a gospel to the circumcision.

Even so, I think that the things written that apply to the gospel of the uncircumcision also apply to the circumcised; and vice versa.

We are not to discount certain aspects of what the word of the Lord teaches; but we are to apply the whole counsel of God.

The gospel to the circumcision is a valid gospel and we are not to reject its input into our lives.

 

[Davy]

Hello @Davy,

I was certainly not saying that Jesus didn't come to save the Gentiles!

My understanding is that there is no scripture verse that will truly contradict any other scripture verse.

Romans 15:8;

and Romans 15:9-12;

are obviously talking about two different and separate things.
....

Well, Paul was not talking of two separate things in those Rom.15:8-12 Scriptures like you infer. There aren't two Gospels going on there at all. But you certainly appear determined to ADD that idea there which isn't there at all. So maybe you ought to try snowing someone else. I don't buy into your rhetoric.

 

[justbyfaith]

Well, Paul was not talking of two separate things in those Rom.15:8-12 Scriptures like you infer. There aren't two Gospels going on there at all. But you certainly appear determined to ADD that idea there which isn't there at all. So maybe you ought to try showing <fify> someone else. I don't buy into your rhetoric.

Hey friend;

I didn't come up with the idea of two gospels and then try to find it in the scriptures to substantiate my opinion.

I stumbled on the idea as it exists in the Holy Bible one day as I was reading through Paul's epistle to the Galatians.

That Paul was speaking of two separate things in Romans 15:8-12 is evident by the use of the word "And" at the beginning of verse 9.

You certainly have the right in this country to reject the testimony of God's word if you so desire. No one is stopping you from doing that. If that is what you want to do, then consider my posting here to be to the general public and not to you.