Bible Study new covenant

[wavy]

Re: covenant

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.

Well, no it does not specifically mention Yahshua. However, there is overwhelming evidence for the two-house message all over the NT by Yahshua himself. Indeed, it's the very reason he came:

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

There was a house of Israel. They were just scattered and lost all over the world. This is his mission to restore the kingdom of Israel by sending his apostles into all nations as per Acts 1:6-8. Also, this new covenant cannot have been put into effect unless with the death of the "testator" according to Hebrews 9:16-17. As far as this:

Thus he is addressing an ingathered Jewish people.

Not "Jewish" people. Jews are from the house of Judah. They are Israelites, but being an Israelite does not make you a Jew.

This state of affairs did not exist at the time of Jesus or after his crucifixtion.

They very much did.

 

[einstein]

covenant

I think you are confused. When Jeremiah talks about 2 Houses he is referring to the Northern Kingdom of "Israel" and the kingdom of Judah. In the next verse when he speaks of one House of Israel he is talking about a united nation. When Jesus speaks of the lost sheep of Israel he is using the term to describe the Jewish nation as a whole.

Jewishness is defined by Jewish law (halacha) as being born of a Jewish mother.An Israelite is a descendant of Israel (Jacob). Prior to the destruction of the Northern Kingdom by Assyria the term was usually reserved to people of the Northern Kingdom but could also be applied to Judeans, although by convention
this was also the House of Judah .

As you stated in your post, the nation was scattered at the time of Jesus and contrary to what Jeremiah stated, there was no ingathering following the crucifixtion. In fact the greatest diaspora in Jewish history took place following the failed rebellion of Bar Kochba ca.135. It's obvious that the new covenant was not in effect at this time. For you to state that it went "into effect" and is still now evolving for more thatn 2000 years is subjective speculation and not based on any scriptural analysis that I can see.

 

[wavy]

Re: covenant

I think you are confused. When Jeremiah talks about 2 Houses he is referring to the Northern Kingdom of "Israel" and the kingdom of Judah.

Yes, I know this. I don't know how I indicated I was confused about this...

In the next verse when he speaks of one House of Israel he is talking about a united nation. When Jesus speaks of the lost sheep of Israel he is using the term to describe the Jewish nation as a whole.

Jewish Israel was not "lost". I believe the house of Israel is distinguished from Judah in Jeremiah 31:33.

Jewishness is defined by Jewish law (halacha) as being born of a Jewish mother.

Halacha means "way", "conduct" or "to walk". I've never heard it used in this context. Jewishiness is defined by being indentified with the house of Judah. Very rarerly in the NT is "Jew" interchangeable with "Israel".

An Israelite is a descendant of Israel (Jacob).

Yes, Jews are Israelites, but my point was being an Israelite does not make you a "Jew".

As you stated in your post, the nation was scattered at the time of Jesus and contrary to what Jeremiah stated, there was no ingathering following the crucifixtion.

Not immediately, no. But the message of liberty and freedom from exile was continued by Yahshua's disciples. As I said, I believe the ultimate final ingathering will be in the end right before Yahshua comes.

For you to state that it went "into effect" and is still now evolving for more thatn 2000 years is subjective speculation and not based on any scriptural analysis that I can see.

The new covenant doesn't mention the ingathering. Just the redemption and a future of both houses together, finally, I believe, in the millenial kingdom. Speculation only because we haven't discussed it yet, really.

 

[einstein]

covenant

I am of the opinion that these passages from Jeremiah are messianic in nature. If I understand you correctly, you seem to be saying they are also messianic. However, we obviously differ when it comes to timeframes.

You have stated in previous posts that the new covenant comes into effect with Jesus-with his death and crucifixtion. This seems to be the mainstream Christian interpretation, i.e. the new covenant is the covenant of the cross which replaces the old covenant i.e. the sinai covenant. In order to promote this view you are put into a position of insisting that this covenant has been evolving for over 2000 years and may be fulfilled with Jesus' second coming.

A simple reading of the passages, from my pespective, however, indicates that the time of the new covenant is still in the future. Again, a simple reading indicates that in this future era the previously separated Houses of Israel and Judah will be reunited under a single kingdom of "Israel". When that time arrives there will be universal knowledge of God (a standard prophecy in the Tanach of the Messianic Age).

The Sinai covenant was a contractual agreement between God and Israel. The nation was to obey the Torah. The Torah is not the covenant but the Book of the Covenant (sefer habrit) Ex24:7. The prophets (including Jeremiah) state that the Torah is forever. The major difference between the old and new covenant is where the Torah will reside in the Messianic era. In the original Sinai covenant the Torah was placed in the mouths of the Israelites

Ex13:9-And it shall be to you for a sign upon your hand, and for a memorial between your eyes, in order that the Torah of the Lord shall be in your mouth....

In the Messianic era where there is truly universal knowledge of God the Torah will still abide, but will be ingrained in the hearts of men.

Jer31:32-For this is the covenant that I shall form with the House of Israel after those days says the Lord. I will place my Torah (torati) within them, and I will inscribe it upon their heart and I will be their God and they shall be a people for Me.

 

[Radlad72]

The 'new' covenant is merely a new slant on the 'old' covenant. The Laws are still written on our hearts and minds and therefore are always at our disposal. We were obviously lax with our obedience of the Laws written on stone, but if they are on our hearts and minds we now have no excuse to not follow them.

John, in his first epistle, tells us that we are to follow Jesus' Commandments and that they are not hard to keep. The Commandments are still there and they are not suddenly defunct because Jesus died on the Cross. He never got rid of the Commandments as they are now written on our hearts and are not gone at all.

The new covenant is the old, but know more clear to us.

The wages of sin is still death and sin is still transgression of the Law and the Law is the same as was given to the ISRAELITES (not Jews) in the Sinai Desert all those years ago. So if we transgress that old Law (which is now written on our hearts as well as on slabs of stone) we are still sinning. This is how we know we are sinning.

The OLD and NEW are no different from each other when you have a look at it.

Rad.

 

[wavy]

Re: covenant

You have stated in previous posts that the new covenant comes into effect with Jesus-with his death and crucifixtion. This seems to be the mainstream Christian interpretation, i.e. the new covenant is the covenant of the cross which replaces the old covenant i.e. the sinai covenant.

Trust me, if you spend a lot of time with me, you'll know I differ from the mainstream in many ways. Just ask around, lol. But anyway, not that it replaces it and changes contents etc...

But it is a renewal. The redeemed birth of the nation at Sinai.

In order to promote this view you are put into a position of insisting that this covenant has been evolving for over 2000 years and may be fulfilled with Jesus' second coming.

Not evolving. It is firm and sure. What I mean are the events that go along with the covenant declaration. The "after those days" in Jeremiah 31:33 I take to mean the days after Messiah's atonement.

A simple reading of the passages, from my pespective, however, indicates that the time of the new covenant is still in the future. Again, a simple reading indicates that in this future era the previously separated Houses of Israel and Judah will be reunited under a single kingdom of "Israel". When that time arrives there will be universal knowledge of God (a standard prophecy in the Tanach of the Messianic Age).

Indeed. This would have happened a long time ago if Yahshua had not been a stumbling block to both houses. But Yahshua declared:

Matthew 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Matthew 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Matthew 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Baruch Haba BeShem Ha Adon YHWH".

Because of this, immediate healing and restoration would be prolonged. This is my opinion. When both houses come to Yahshua (Judah) and Torah (Ephraim Israel), since both are lacking in different areas, and learn Yahweh's Name, then the restoration will start coming to pass and YHWH will gain great fame in the earth. Even as he said he would in Deuteronomy if Israel (all 12 tribes) obeyed his voice.

But I don't believe all this will finally come to pass and be established with no back-pedalling until Yahweh delcares:

Revelation 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

I could very much well be wrong, but this is how I see it.

The Sinai covenant was a contractual agreement between God and Israel. The nation was to obey the Torah.

Indeed.

The Torah is not the covenant but the Book of the Covenant (sefer habrit) Ex24:7.

Some one finally understands. Sadly, many people on here don't get this.

The prophets (including Jeremiah) state that the Torah is forever.

The Torah states that the Torah is forever, lol.

The major difference between the old and new covenant is where the Torah will reside in the Messianic era. In the original Sinai covenant the Torah was placed in the mouths of the Israelites

Ex13:9-And it shall be to you for a sign upon your hand, and for a memorial between your eyes, in order that the Torah of the Lord shall be in your mouth....

In the Messianic era where there is truly universal knowledge of God the Torah will still abide, but will be ingrained in the hearts of men.

Jer31:32-For this is the covenant that I shall form with the House of Israel after those days says the Lord. I will place my Torah (torati) within them, and I will inscribe it upon their heart and I will be their God and they shall be a people for Me.

Well, I don't see this as a difference for reason of these simple scriptures:

Deuteronomy 6:6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:


Deuteronomy 30:10 If thou shalt hearken unto the voice of YHWH thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which are written in this book of the Torah, and if thou turn unto YHWH thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul.
Deuteronomy 30:11 For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.
Deuteronomy 30:12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?
Deuteronomy 30:13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?
Deuteronomy 30:14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.


David, for example, also knew the Torah was supposed to be on the heart. the whole 119th Psalm is dedicated to Torah. He states:

...Well, just read my signature, lol.

 

[JM]

"God has one grand purposeâ€â€to glorify Himself in Christ. This plan involves glory in TWO spheresâ€â€the earthly and the heavenly."


I have little or no arguement with what's been posted so far.

Peace,

JM

 

[JM]

Old and New Covenants are clearly Jewish. Follow me for a moment…

Acts 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

What was the promise of the Father? The Kingdom to Israel.

v.6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

Again, the Kingdom is the theme.

v. 7-8….ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

This is a continuation of the last chapter of Luke (53 Days between), no new revelation is given of the mystery.

v. 10 Angels are still there see also Luke 24:4

v.11 Jesus will return to Jerusalem the same way He left.

v. 12 Sabbath is mentioned, this is clearly a Jewish audience.

v. 13-14 ‘one accord’

v. 15-26 Matthias was counted as one of the twelve, Paul is not of the 12 apostles.

2:1 Jewish feast day of Pentecost, one according and still looking for the New Covenant. Jeremiah 31:31 (Eze. 36:24 ‘gathered’) Israel & Judah, v.33 “Law†written on the inward parts as a fulfillment of prophecy.

v. 2 “as of†“like†=>John 3:8, Eze. 37:9, 18.

v. 3 “like as of†cloven tongues = divided tongues, a reversal of what was done @ Babylon.

v. 4 walk in God’s statues.

v. 5, 6 Devout Jews speaking in there own languages.

v. 9 lists places from which they came.

v. 12-14 Peter preached ‘men of Judea’ at Jerusalem, v.22 ‘ye men of Israel’

 

[JM]

Wrong. The word is "administration" in all references. No such thing as dispensationalism.

Dispensationalism is a systematic theology that recognizes distinct “economies†in the outworking of God’s purposes on earth. That is, it recognizes that God relates to mankind in different ways at different times. This understanding is in part based upon the Greek word oikonomia, which is often translated “dispensation†in the KJV. Oikonomia means “managing or administering the affairs of a household.†God, therefore, is the householder, and entrusts stewardship or administrational responsibilities to men throughout the various “ages.†Man’s failure to uphold these responsibilities has caused God to keep revising his relationship with mankind, and adjusting what he has required of him.

Dispensationalism is grounded in the biblical truth that there are only three distinct groups of human beings on earth todayâ€â€Jew, Gentile and the Church of God, a.k.a “the Body of Christ†or “Christians†(1 Cor. 10:32)â€â€and recognizes God’s various ways of dealing with each.

The verb oikonomeo is found once and translaed as "to be a steward," the noun oikonomos is found ten times (Luke 12:42, 16:1, 3, 8; Romans 16:23; 1 Cor. 4:1-2; Gal. 4:2; Titus 1:7; 1 Pet. 4:10) and is translated as "steward" an d"manager." The noun oikonomia, nine times (LK 16:2,3,4; 1 Cor. 9:17; Eph. 1:10, 3:2, 9; Col. 1:25; 1 Tim. 1:4) and is translated as "stewardship," "dispensaiton," "administration," "job" and "commission."

 

[JM]

Quote: The “New Covenant†was not a secret. It was prophesied in many places in the Old Testament. The focal point of the “Secret†is that Gentiles who believe in Christ as “Lord†would be fellow heirs with Israelites who believe. They would be part of the same Body, a new creation, the “one new man†of Ephesians 2:15, and partakers of “the promise in Christ Jesus.†But does that mean that the only variable was who would make up this Church?

Let us liken the “Church,†which Jesus said he would build out of those Israelites who responded to his message, to a blue caterpillar. The Gentiles, meanwhile, are a red caterpillar, living on a separate tree, despised and looked down upon by the blue one. Using this analogy, was the Secret that the blue caterpillar (the Jewish believers in Christ) would come over and swallow the red one (the Gentile believers) and become a much bigger and better blue caterpillar? This is the position furthered by some who teach that “Christianity†is really “Messianic Judaism,†and that Gentile believers ought to keep the Jewish feasts, etc. Or was it that the red caterpillar would come over and swallow the blue one? This is the belief that the Church replaces Israel, a belief held by Roman Catholicism, many people partial to Reformed Theology (such as some Lutherans) and a growing number of “charismatic†groups.

Neither of these scenarios is the one set forth in the Church Epistles. The Secret was that some of the Jews (the blue) and some of the Gentiles (the red) were made by the Lord into a “new creation.†God combined and transformed the old caterpillars into a beautiful purple butterfly, as it were, called “the Church of God,†or “one new man.†The Church of the Body of Christ that began on Pentecost is not in any way an extension of or the continuation of Israel. Rather, it is an entirely new creation that is “neither Jew nor Greek†(Gal. 3:28; Eph. 2:15). In most Bibles, the Greek word musterion is translated “mystery,†but it does not mean that which is mysterious or inherently unknowable. It means “sec,†that which is knowable to whom it is revealed, and it should be translated as “secret,†not “mystery,†in Ephesians 3 and many other places.

 

[wavy]

Well, I disagree wholeheartedly, JM. But I don't feel like getting into now.

I will say however that the "mystery" is not two groups becoming something "new" that is not Israel.

The "mystery", as it ties in with the TRUE nature of Paul's ministry concerns two-house restoration. Judah united back with Ephraim somehow through Paul's ministry to the nations (not pagans in the nations).

Please read Romans 11:25 and compare with Genesis 48:19 and the mystery begins to come clear. This is also touched on in my "Gentiles of the NT?" thread.