The New About The New Covenant

[Webers_Home]

-
● Jer 31:31-34 . . Behold, the days are coming, declares The Lord, when I
will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah,
not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took
them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that
they broke, though I was their husband, declares The Lord.

. . . But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after
those days, declares The Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write
it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be My people. And
no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying
"know The Lord" for they shall all know Me, from the least of them to the
greatest, declares The Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will
remember their sin no more.

The original covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God under oath
contains a number of curses for non compliance. They're on display at Ex
34:6-7, Lev 26:3-38, Deut 27:15-26, and Deut 28:1-69.

Those curses are covenanted, i.e. they're contractual; which means that
when the Jews, as a people, fail to comply with the covenant, God is
obligated to slam them with any number of misfortunes including throwing
them to the wolves, e.g. Nebuchadnezzar, Titus, and Hitler.

The new covenant contains no curses of a contractual nature; viz: God isn't
obligated to slam its participants for non compliance.
_

 

[Philip James]

Hebrews 10: 19-39

Seems to me compliance is necessary

Peace!

 

[Webers_Home]

-
Another thing different in the new covenant is the nature of its high
priesthood.

NOTE: A biblical high priesthood doesn't consist of a guild of priests, i.e. it's
an office held by only one man at a time; typically to his death.

The new covenant's high priesthood is patterned after a man in the Old
Testament named Melchizedek (Gen 14:18-20). Mel isn't a precise rendition
of the new covenant's high priesthood; he's only what's known as a "type"
i.e. an analogy.

In my opinion, the one thing about Mel that really stands out is his
superiority over Aaron's high priesthood. In other words: Mel's high
priesthood trumps Aaron's; viz: in situations where Aaron's law and
Melchizedek's law conflict, Mel's law is the rule. (Heb 7:4-10)

A very important thing about Mel is the era in which he lived. Mel was
contemporary with Abraham, which was something like 400+ years prior to
the institution of the old covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God
as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

That's a tremendous advantage because biblical law isn't retroactive viz: it
doesn't have ex post facto jurisdiction (Deut 5:2-4, Gal 3:17); which means
that none of the old covenant's curses for non compliance applied to either Mel
or to his constituents; which, at the time, included Abraham. Good thing too
because Abe married his half sister; a death offense within the
jurisdiction of the old covenant. (Lev 20:17)

Christ is the new covenant's high priest and his office is patterned after
Melchizedek's (Ps 110:4, Heb 5:4-6) which means of course that, like as
Mel's, Christ's constituents are in no danger of the old covenant's curses.

Christ will always be the new covenant's high priest because unlike Aaron,
Christ is immortal (Rom 6:9). Ergo: Christ's constituents will never, ever, be
in danger of the old covenant's curses; from now on till time without end.
_

 

[GodsGrace]

Hebrews 10: 19-39

Seems to me compliance is necessary

Peace!

God always requires compliance with His moral laws,
however, the New Covenant is unilateral,,,and as such it has no curses attached to it.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
The covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God as per Exodus,
Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy contains an extensive sacrificial
system. The most important ritual is Yom Kippur's annual procedure, a.k.a.
the great day of atonement.

One of Yom Kippur's purposes is to remind the people that their sins are still
on the books; even sins for which they offered regular sacrifices all during
the year.

The problem is: the covenant's sacrifices obtain pardons and forgiveness and
cleansing for the people, but the sacrifices aren't sufficient to obtain
innocence for them nor to get their records wiped clean. In other words;
Yom Kippur may obtain forgiveness, pardon, and cleansing for dishonesty;
but on the books the offender will still be listed as a liar.

And on top of that, the very moment the ritual ends, people begin
accumulating new sins towards the next Yom Kippur so there's never really a
moment when the people are guiltless.

BTW: Never, ever, ever wish Jews a pleasant Yom Kippur because it's
supposed to be a national day of self-affliction. (Lev 16:29-31)

So then, Yom Kippurs are endless; one is never enough because the ritual is
always for the past, never for the future. In other words; Yom Kippurs are
always catching up with the people's sins instead of getting out ahead of
them.

The new covenant doesn't have an extensive sacrificial system, nor does it
have an endless parade of annual rituals like Yom Kippur. It had but one
sacrifice; just one, and it's good for all time. In other words: the new
covenant's sacrifice isn't only for past sins, but also for sins of the future
that people haven't even committed yet.

Plus, the new covenant's sacrifice is sufficient to get the people off their
perpetual guilt trip because it not only obtains pardons and forgiveness and
cleansing, but also an acquittal and a complete wipe; something nobody gets
from Yom Kippur.

FAQ: Doesn't Yom Kippur's scapegoat effect a wipe?

A: The soul that sins, it shall die, i.e. the wages of sin is death. Well; the
scapegoat is allowed to live rather than executed, so justice for the
worshippers' sins remains pending; hanging over their heads like a sword of
Damocles.
_

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Another thing different in the new covenant (very different) is the nature of
its high priesthood.

NOTE: A biblical high priesthood doesn't consist of a guild of priests, i.e. it's
an office held by only one man at a time; typically to his death.

The new covenant's high priesthood is patterned after a man in the Old
Testament named Melchizedek (Gen 14:18-20). Mel isn't a precise rendition
of the new covenant's high priesthood; he's only what's known as a "type"
i.e. an analogy.

In my opinion, the one thing about Mel that really stands out is his
superiority over Aaron's high priesthood. In other words: Mel's high
priesthood trumps Aaron's; viz: in situations where Aaron's law and
Melchizedek's law conflict, Mel's law is the rule. (Heb 7:4-10)

A very important thing about Mel is the era in which he lived. Mel was
contemporary with Abraham, which was something like 400+ years prior to
the institution of the old covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God
as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

That's a tremendous advantage because biblical law isn't retroactive viz: it
doesn't have ex post facto jurisdiction (Deut 5:2-4, Gal 3:17); which means
that none of the old covenant's curses for non compliance applied to either
Mel or to his constituents; which, at the time, included Abraham. Good thing
too because Abe married his half sister; a death offense within the
jurisdiction of the old covenant. (Lev 20:17)

Christ is the new covenant's high priest and his office is patterned after
Melchizedek's (Ps 110:4, Heb 5:4-6) which means of course that, like as
Mel's, Christ's constituents are in no danger of the old covenant's curses.

Christ will always be the new covenant's high priest because unlike Aaron,
Christ is immortal (Rom 6:9). Ergo: Christ's constituents will never, ever, be
in danger of the old covenant's curses; from now on till time without end.
_

 

[Webers_Home]

.
The covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God as per Exodus,
Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy contains an extensive sacrificial
system. The most important ritual is Yom Kippur's annual procedure, a.k.a.
the great day of atonement.

One of Yom Kippur's purposes is to remind the people that their sins are still
on the books; even sins for which they offered regular sacrifices all during
the year.

The problem is: the covenant's sacrifices obtain pardons and forgiveness and
cleansing for the people, but the sacrifices aren't sufficient to obtain
innocence for them nor to get their records wiped clean. In other words;
Yom Kippur may obtain forgiveness, pardon, and cleansing for dishonesty;
but on the books the offender will still be listed as a liar.

And on top of that, the very moment the ritual ends, people begin
accumulating new sins towards the next Yom Kippur so there's never really a
moment when the people are guiltless.

BTW: Never, ever, ever wish Jews a pleasant Yom Kippur because it's
supposed to be a national day of self-affliction. (Lev 16:29-31)

So then, Yom Kippurs are endless; one is never enough because the ritual is
always for the past, never for the future. In other words; Yom Kippurs are
always catching up with the people's sins instead of getting out ahead of
them.

The new covenant doesn't have an extensive sacrificial system, nor does it
have an endless parade of annual rituals like Yom Kippur. It had but one
sacrifice; just one, and it's good for all time. In other words: the new
covenant's sacrifice isn't only for past sins, but also for sins of the future
that people haven't even committed yet.

Plus, the new covenant's sacrifice is sufficient to get the people off their
perpetual guilt trip because it not only obtains pardons and forgiveness and
cleansing, but also an acquittal and a complete wipe; something nobody gets
from Yom Kippur.

FAQ: Doesn't Yom Kippur's scapegoat effect a wipe?

A: The soul that sins, it shall die, i.e. the wages of sin is death. Well; the
scapegoat is allowed to live rather than executed, so justice for the
worshippers' sins remains pending; hanging over their heads like a sword of
Damocles.
_

 

[Webers_Home]

.
_ Switching To The New Covenant _

● Matt 5:18 . .Verily, I say unto you: Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or
one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

Christ's statement reveals that the Jews can't just walk away from the
covenant that their ancestors agreed upon with God as per Exodus,
Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy without first fulfilling this one
particular curse:

● Deut 27:26 . . Cursed be anyone who does not confirm the words of this
law by doing them.

The apostle Paul posted a reminder of that curse in one of his epistles.

● Gal 3:10 . . Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in
the Book of the Law, and do them.

Note the grammatical tense of the curse; it's present tense rather than
future, indicating that curses for non compliance are instant; no delay and
no waiting period-- "cursed be" is right now. For example:

● Lev 19:11 . . You shall not deal falsely, nor lie to one another.

Every time a Jew breaks that law they incur a curse upon themselves; and
those curses have a way of piling up. Let's say a Jew racks up 100 counts of
dishonesty during their lifetime. Well; that's 100 curses that they need to
clear off the books before they can be freed to sign on with the new
covenant.

Seeing as how there has been neither a Temple nor a fully functioning
priesthood on duty in Jerusalem since Titus destroyed the place in 70ad,
then every dishonest Jew since then has had no way to get their accrued
curses mitigated in a covenanted manner.

In God's judicious estimation, the only satisfactory alternative, in lieu of
slamming the offender, is to lay the blame on a suitable substitute.

● Isa 53:6 . . All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every
one, to his own way; and Jehovah has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

NOTE: The suitable substitute has to be willing of course or the whole
business would be a ritual murder.

FAQ: According to Ezek 18:20, people have to pay for their own sins; i.e.
another cannot take their blame nor die nor in their place. How then was
Christ's sacrifice a legitimate stand-in for the sins of the entire world?

A: The secret is in the timing.

According to 1Pet 1:20, Rev 13:8, and Rev 17:8, Jesus Christ was put on
track to satisfy justice for the sins of the world prior to the creation of the
cosmos.

According to Deut 5:2-4 and Gal 3:17, biblical law isn't retroactive viz: it
doesn't have ex post facto jurisdiction.

So then, seeing as how Jesus Christ was tagged to pay for the sins of the
world many, many years prior to Ezekiel's proclamation . . .

BTW: Were Ezek 18:20 to successfully rule out Jesus, it would also rule out
the man spoken of in Isa 53:6 whoever he might be.
_

 

[epostle1]

.
Another thing different in the new covenant (very different) is the nature of
its high priesthood.

NOTE: A biblical high priesthood doesn't consist of a guild of priests, i.e. it's
an office held by only one man at a time; typically to his death.

The new covenant's high priesthood is patterned after a man in the Old
Testament named Melchizedek (Gen 14:18-20). Mel isn't a precise rendition
of the new covenant's high priesthood; he's only what's known as a "type"
i.e. an analogy.

In my opinion, the one thing about Mel that really stands out is his
superiority over Aaron's high priesthood. In other words: Mel's high
priesthood trumps Aaron's; viz: in situations where Aaron's law and
Melchizedek's law conflict, Mel's law is the rule. (Heb 7:4-10)

A very important thing about Mel is the era in which he lived. Mel was
contemporary with Abraham, which was something like 400+ years prior to
the institution of the old covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God
as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

That's a tremendous advantage because biblical law isn't retroactive viz: it
doesn't have ex post facto jurisdiction (Deut 5:2-4, Gal 3:17); which means
that none of the old covenant's curses for non compliance applied to either
Mel or to his constituents; which, at the time, included Abraham. Good thing
too because Abe married his half sister; a death offense within the
jurisdiction of the old covenant. (Lev 20:17)

Christ is the new covenant's high priest and his office is patterned after
Melchizedek's (Ps 110:4, Heb 5:4-6) which means of course that, like as
Mel's, Christ's constituents are in no danger of the old covenant's curses.

Christ will always be the new covenant's high priest because unlike Aaron,
Christ is immortal (Rom 6:9). Ergo: Christ's constituents will never, ever, be
in danger of the old covenant's curses; from now on till time without end.
_

The historic Church has always taught that Jesus is the High Priest.
At the time of the Exodus the high priest was Aaron (Ex. 31:30), the ministerial priests were his four sons (Ex. 28:21); the sons were Nadab, Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar, the first two of which were killed for abusing their priestly duties), and the universal priests were the people of Israel as a whole (Exodus 19:6).

Prior to this time, there had been neither a high priest nor had God elected all of Israel as universal priests. There was only the ministerial priesthood, which appears to have resided in the firstborn male of each family. The existence of the pre-Aaronic ministerial priesthood is shown in Exodus 19:22 and 24 which differentiate the priests from the people but occur before the establishment in the Aaronic priesthood in Exodus 28. The fact that the ministerial priests were held by the firstborn is suggested (though not proven) by the exchange of the priestly tribe of Levi for the firstborn of Israel in Numbers 3.

In any event, the three-fold model of the priesthood which was in use at the time of Aaron was carried over into the New Testament and thus we find there also a high priest, ministerial priests, and universal priests.

In the New Testament age the high priest is Jesus Christ (Heb. 3:1),
the ministerial priests are Christ’s ordained ministers of the gospel (Rom. 15:1), and the universal priests are the entire Christian people (1 Peter. 2:5, 9).

So the Bible clearly states that all Christians are priests (1 Peter 2:5,9) But the Bible also said the same thing about the Israelites (Ex. 19:6), yet this did not prevent there from being a separate, ministerial priesthood even before the Law of Moses was given (Ex. 19:22, 24).
http://jimmyakin.com/library/the-office-of-new-testament-priest

Gen. 14:18 – this is the first time that the word “priest” is used in Old Testament. Melchizedek is both a priest and a king and he offers a bread and wine sacrifice to God.

Psalm 76:2 – Melchizedek is the king of Salem. Salem is the future Jeru-salem where Jesus, the eternal priest and king, established his new Kingdom and the Eucharistic sacrifice which He offered under the appearance of bread and wine.

Psalm 110:4 – this is the prophecy that Jesus will be the eternal priest and king in the same manner as this mysterious priest Melchizedek. This prophecy requires us to look for an eternal bread and wine sacrifice in the future. This prophecy is fulfilled only by the Eucharistic sacrifice of the Catholic Church.
Heb. 5:6,10; 6:20; 7:15,17 – these verses show that Jesus restores the father-son priesthood after Melchizedek. Jesus is the new priest and King of Jerusalem and feeds the new children of Abraham with His body and blood. This means that His eternal sacrifice is offered in the same manner as the bread and wine offered by Melchizedek in Gen. 14:18. But the bread and wine that Jesus offers is different, just as the Passover Lamb of the New Covenant is different. The bread and wine become His body and blood by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit.

Heb. 9:12 – Jesus enters into heaven, the Holy Place, taking His own blood. How can this be? He wasn’t bleeding after the resurrection. This is because He enters into the heavenly sanctuary to mediate the covenant of His body and blood by eternally offering it to the Father. This offering is made present to us in the same manner as Melchizedek’s offering, under the appearance of bread and wine.

Melchizedek doesn't "trump" Arron. There is no power struggle.

Weber, it's disappointing to see a man of your biblical expertise mess up "high priest" and the New Testament priesthood the way you do.

 

[Webers_Home]

.

it's disappointing to see a man of your biblical expertise mess up "high
priest" and the New Testament priesthood the way you do.

People who disagree with the so-called historic Church aren't ep ipso messed up.
Don't be such a bigot.
_

 

[epostle1]

.


People who disagree with the so-called historic Church aren't ep ipso messed up. Don't be such a bigot.
_

Disagreement is not the same as denial. Don't be such a revisionist.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
The so-called historic church needs more than revision; it needs guidance,
to help its leadership, and its followers, come to their senses.
_

 

[epostle1]

.
The so-called historic church needs more than revision; it needs guidance,
to help its leadership, and its followers, come to their senses.
_

Blame it on the Holy Spirit. It was the leadership guided by the Holy Spirit that compiled the holy books of the Bible. It was the leadership guided by the Holy Spirit that clarified the teaching of the Trinity, to refute the "Bible alone" heretics, at the Council of Chalcedon (and others) in 451 AD. Their authoritive verdicts are accepted by Protestants, Orthodox and Catholics. No date or council is ever given when the Church allegedly fell away, but you are forced to keep the myth alive. "upon this rock I will build my temporary church???" Your criticism of the Church is illogical and self defeating.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
_ Gentiles And The New Covenant _

"The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ" (Gal 3:24)

The koiné Greek word for "schoolmaster" is paidagogos (pahee-dag-o-gos')
which defines not a headmaster, nor a teacher, nor a tutor. It essentially
defines a servant whose responsibility it was to get their master's children to
school. In other words: a sort of chaperone who made sure the kids got
there; even if the servant had to take them by the hand to do it.

The "law" to which the writer refers is the covenant that Moses' people
agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

Although Gentiles per se aren't covenanted with God to comply with that
law, it's useful for revealing God's feelings about certain kinds of behavior.

● Rom 3:20 . . For by the law is the knowledge of sin.

When informed Gentiles ignore the law after being told what it is; then they
become deliberate sinners, i.e. scofflaws; and that has serious consequences.

● Num 15:30-31 . .The person, be he citizen or stranger, who acts defiantly
reviles the Lord; that person shall be cut off from among his people.
Because he has spurned the word of the Lord and violated His
commandment, that person shall be cut off-- he bears his guilt.

Take for example David's acts of premeditated murder and adultery in the
matter of Uriah and his wife Bathsheba. Those were deliberated sins; and in
accordance with Num 15:30-31 there is neither pardon nor forgiveness
available for them; in point of fact, there are no sacrifices for them either.

● Ps 51:16 . .You would not be pleased with sacrifices, or I would bring
them. If I brought you a burnt offering, you would not accept it.

● Heb 10:26 . . If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the
knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left

Most Gentiles will never commit the sins of premeditated murder and
adultery, but there is a sin that I'd be willing to bet every Gentile commits
sooner or later at some time in their life; maybe even multiple times.

● Lev 19:11 . . You shall not deal falsely, nor lie to one another.

Once a Gentile is made aware that their maker frowns upon dishonesty,
henceforth they get cut off in accordance with Num 15:30-31 when they
disobey Lev 19:11.

So; what might "cut off" amount to? Well; for one: no dishonesty will be
allowed in the holy city foretold in the book of Revelation.

● Rev 21:27 . . No one who practices lying shall ever come into it

● Rev 22:14-15 . . Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they
may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into
the city. But outside are whoever loves and practices a lie.

The schoolmaster's task then; is to instill fear in dishonesty, and make
Gentiles aware that if they opt to take their chances, and stand before God
to be judged on their own merits; that they haven't the slightest, slimmest
possibility of coming away unscathed. It's a 110% forgone conclusion that
they will come away dead.

● Rev 21:8 . . All liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire
and brimstone, which is the second death.

So; why does the schoolmaster bring Gentiles to Christ?

Well; his sacrifice is above the law because it was established before the law
(1Pet 1:20, Rev 13:8, and Rev 17:8) and it's effective for deliberate sins. In
other words: Christ is the one and only safety net for willful dishonesty.

● Acts 13:39 . .Through him everyone who believes is justified from
everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses.

The Greek word translated "justified" is dikaioo (dik-ah-yo'-o) which
essentially means to declare someone innocent, i.e. exonerated.

How does God exonerate people when they're 110% guilty as charged
without committing a miscarriage of justice? Well; that just goes to show
how effective Christ's crucifixion really is. It not only adequately satisfies
justice for people's sins, but also defends God from allegations of judicial
misconduct. (Rom 3:25)

FYI: It's commonly wondered how God was able to forgive David's terrible
sins seeing as how the first covenant allows neither pardon, nor forgiveness,
nor sacrifices for them. Well; that was easy peasy lemon squeezy. God laid
David's willful sins on Christ and satisfied justice for them there. (Rom 3:23
26)

Jesus said that Abraham knew about Christ (John 8:56). He also said that
David wrote about him (Mark 12:35-37). The prophets too. (Luke 24:25-27,
Luke 24:44, and 1Pet 1:10-11).

So then, Christians ought not to think of themselves at the forefront of belief
in Christ. Plenty of Old Testament luminaries believed in him before they
did; even old Jacob. (Gen 49:18)
_

 

[Webers_Home]

.
_ The Inner Self _

● Jer 31:33 . . I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts.

I'm pretty sure that verse should be interpreted by this one:

● Ezek 36:26-27 . . I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within
you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of
flesh. I will put My spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes,
and you will keep My judgments and do them.

What we're looking at in those passages is not so much memorization, but a
miraculous transformation in the core of one's being. In other words; law
written on tables of stone is a code of rules and regulations to live by, while
law written in the mind and on the heart speaks of intuition, predilections,
and proclivities to live by.

In a nutshell: Everybody comes into the world living in accordance human
nature. The new covenant promises to remove human nature from its
beneficiaries and replace it with the nature of God which enables people to
think, feel, act, and speak in ways that satisfy Him without their even
thinking about it. (Col 2:11-13)

The divine nature isn't a pipe dream. Peter wrote about it.

● 2Pet 1:3-4 . . His divine power has given us everything we need for life
and piety through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and
goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious
promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and
escape the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

Somebody is probably wondering why in tarnation didn't God just create
Adam with divine nature to begin with?! Well; I haven't a clue what God was
thinking but it sure seems to my human mind that the world would've been
a whole lots better off had He done so.

"Who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in
him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of
God." (1Cor 2:11)
_