Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Bible Study new covenant
- Thread starter einstein
- Start date
S
SputnikBoy
Guest
wavy said:
G
greyfeather
Guest
Hello,
In Hebrews I think it sums up why the New Covenant was made and why.
HEBREWS 8, the whole chapter tells why the second was made because the first was found with faults.
Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God.
In Hebrews I think it sums up why the New Covenant was made and why.
HEBREWS 8, the whole chapter tells why the second was made because the first was found with faults.
Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God.
G
greyfeather
Guest
wavy,
True faults are faults , people are always the ones who make them . God can not make any faults, but because of mankind not obeying there had to be a New Covenant.
Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called the children of God.
True faults are faults , people are always the ones who make them . God can not make any faults, but because of mankind not obeying there had to be a New Covenant.
Blessed are the peacemakers for they will be called the children of God.
S
SputnikBoy
Guest
greyfeather said:
G
greyfeather
Guest
SputnickBoy,
This was the New Covenant God said he would make with the house of Isreal.
Hebrews 8:7-13
7For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
11And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
12For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God.
This was the New Covenant God said he would make with the house of Isreal.
Hebrews 8:7-13
7For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.
8For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
9Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.
10For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
11And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
12For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
13In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.
Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall be called the children of God.
covenant
Seems to be lots of differing opinions here. As a non-Christian I had the impression that most Christians viewed the new covenant as being the covenant of the cross fulfilled 2000 years ago when Jesus was crucified to atone for all mankinds sins, thus ultimately replacing the Mosaic law. Is this incorrect?
I would point out at this juncture that relying on the passages in Hebrews for an explanation may not be a reliable mode of exegesis. The author of Hebrews either doesn't know Hebrew or purposely mistranslates Jer 31:31 which from the Hebrew translation states: "Not like the covenant I formed with their forefathers on the day I held them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt, for they broke My covenant, although I was a husband unto them says the Lord."
The author of Hebrews translates the words in bold font above as "...and I regarded them not..." which is the antithesis of being a husband (Heb. ba'alti). This purposeful mistranslation casts serious doubts on the motives of the author in rendering a dishonest cast to the passage.
:
Seems to be lots of differing opinions here. As a non-Christian I had the impression that most Christians viewed the new covenant as being the covenant of the cross fulfilled 2000 years ago when Jesus was crucified to atone for all mankinds sins, thus ultimately replacing the Mosaic law. Is this incorrect?
I would point out at this juncture that relying on the passages in Hebrews for an explanation may not be a reliable mode of exegesis. The author of Hebrews either doesn't know Hebrew or purposely mistranslates Jer 31:31 which from the Hebrew translation states: "Not like the covenant I formed with their forefathers on the day I held them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt, for they broke My covenant, although I was a husband unto them says the Lord."
The author of Hebrews translates the words in bold font above as "...and I regarded them not..." which is the antithesis of being a husband (Heb. ba'alti). This purposeful mistranslation casts serious doubts on the motives of the author in rendering a dishonest cast to the passage.
:Re: covenant
Hebrews was written to the Hebrews, we are now in the age of Grace and the Hebrew program picks up only when the Church is removed. The Church began in Acts as a mystery and we find more then one reason for this belief, note that Paul was the only apostle who was ever referred to as "THE" apostle of the Gentiles (Ro.11:11-13; Ro.15:16; Eph.3:1-2; etc., compare Gal.2:7-9). In addition, Paul states that "the dispensation of...grace" was given to him (Eph 3:2; c.f., 1Cor 9:17; Col 1:25). As a dispensationalists I don't believe that the doctrine in the epistles from James - Jude have a direct revelation that we can applied to the church today. I believe much of the NT does apply to future Israel, after she repents and returns to the Lord...the Church has never had a covenant made in time.
JM
einstein said:Seems to be lots of differing opinions here. As a non-Christian I had the impression that most Christians viewed the new covenant as being the covenant of the cross fulfilled 2000 years ago when Jesus was crucified to atone for all mankinds sins, thus ultimately replacing the Mosaic law. Is this incorrect?
I would point out at this juncture that relying on the passages in Hebrews for an explanation may not be a reliable mode of exegesis. The author of Hebrews either doesn't know Hebrew or purposely mistranslates Jer 31:31 which from the Hebrew translation states: "Not like the covenant I formed with their forefathers on the day I held them by the hand to take them out of the land of Egypt, for they broke My covenant, although I was a husband unto them says the Lord."
The author of Hebrews translates the words in bold font above as "...and I regarded them not..." which is the antithesis of being a husband (Heb. ba'alti). This purposeful mistranslation casts serious doubts on the motives of the author in rendering a dishonest cast to the passage.
Hebrews was written to the Hebrews, we are now in the age of Grace and the Hebrew program picks up only when the Church is removed. The Church began in Acts as a mystery and we find more then one reason for this belief, note that Paul was the only apostle who was ever referred to as "THE" apostle of the Gentiles (Ro.11:11-13; Ro.15:16; Eph.3:1-2; etc., compare Gal.2:7-9). In addition, Paul states that "the dispensation of...grace" was given to him (Eph 3:2; c.f., 1Cor 9:17; Col 1:25). As a dispensationalists I don't believe that the doctrine in the epistles from James - Jude have a direct revelation that we can applied to the church today. I believe much of the NT does apply to future Israel, after she repents and returns to the Lord...the Church has never had a covenant made in time.
JM
Re: covenant
Mystery? Or a fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:31-34 with both houses present, and a fulfillment of Joel 2 when Yahweh promised to pour upon Israel? How do you get around this?
To the nations, yes, but for a specific purpose:
Acts 28:20 For this cause therefore have I called for you, to see you, and to speak with you: because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.
Wrong. The word is "administration" in all references. No such thing as dispensationalism.
JM said:
Mystery? Or a fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:31-34 with both houses present, and a fulfillment of Joel 2 when Yahweh promised to pour upon Israel? How do you get around this?
To the nations, yes, but for a specific purpose:
Acts 28:20 For this cause therefore have I called for you, to see you, and to speak with you: because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.
Wrong. The word is "administration" in all references. No such thing as dispensationalism.
L
living4onlyJC
Guest
Jeremiah 31:31-33
"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.
It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them, " declares the LORD.
"This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
"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.
It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them, " declares the LORD.
"This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time," declares the LORD. "I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
Re: covenant
It's been put into effect. The ultimate fulfillment of it has just not been reached yet. At least imo. It was put into effect when Yahshua died and was resurrected with all Israel.
Hebrews repeats this covenant. No provision for any "gentile" new covenant. Not saying that you said that, but just giving my viewpoint.
einstein said:
It's been put into effect. The ultimate fulfillment of it has just not been reached yet. At least imo. It was put into effect when Yahshua died and was resurrected with all Israel.
Hebrews repeats this covenant. No provision for any "gentile" new covenant. Not saying that you said that, but just giving my viewpoint.
covenant
Jeremiah states that the covenant is to be made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah in the period when "the days are coming".Thus he is addressing an ingathered Jewish people. This state of affairs did not exist at the time of Jesus or after his crucifixtion. Then, in Jer31:32(33) he mentions only the House of Israel when he talks about the era "...after those days...".ie the days after the scattered Jewish people are repatriated to the Land of Israel under a re- united kingdom. This is the picture repeatedly presented of the Messianic age and is also so described by other prophets as Isaiah, Zecharia and Ezekiel.
Furthermore Jer31:33(34) is a continuation of this prophecy being introduced by the preposition (ve) "and".. This passage refers to the universal knowledge of God, another theme of the Messianic age. THIS STATE OF AFFAIRS WAS NOT ESTABLISHED IN JESUS' TIME, NOR EVEN TODAY!.There is nothing in Jeremiah that states the covenant will begin in Jesus time (when there was no House of Israel) and would evolve for more than 2000 years.
Jeremiah states that the covenant is to be made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah in the period when "the days are coming".Thus he is addressing an ingathered Jewish people. This state of affairs did not exist at the time of Jesus or after his crucifixtion. Then, in Jer31:32(33) he mentions only the House of Israel when he talks about the era "...after those days...".ie the days after the scattered Jewish people are repatriated to the Land of Israel under a re- united kingdom. This is the picture repeatedly presented of the Messianic age and is also so described by other prophets as Isaiah, Zecharia and Ezekiel.
Furthermore Jer31:33(34) is a continuation of this prophecy being introduced by the preposition (ve) "and".. This passage refers to the universal knowledge of God, another theme of the Messianic age. THIS STATE OF AFFAIRS WAS NOT ESTABLISHED IN JESUS' TIME, NOR EVEN TODAY!.There is nothing in Jeremiah that states the covenant will begin in Jesus time (when there was no House of Israel) and would evolve for more than 2000 years.