JE stated,
the NEW Covenant is clearly an extension of the Abrahamic Covenant (Gal 3:8-9; Gen. 12:3; 18:18; 22:18).
------------------------------------------------------------
Steve replied,
I want to cry out, ‘No, no, 10,000 times no! This is precisely where Paedobaptists go wrong. They impose Abraham upon Christ. ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, Before Abraham was, I AM!’ (John 8:58 ). The Abrahamic Covenant was a covenant of promise (cf. Eph 2:12 ). It was an adumbration of something that, though it was yet to come, had been in the mind of God from all eternity (Micah 5:2 ). You must read the Genesis account of Abraham in the light of what we are told in the NT (Rom, Gal. Heb etc) if you are to understand it fully, not the other way around. Abraham may be the father of the faithful, but Christ is the author of faith (Heb 12:2 ).
Begin <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" /> Of course, Christ was before Abram/Abraham, however you are saying that Christ and Abraham are involved in two “totally” different covenants, which is not true. Though Christ is before Abraham, God historically placed Abraham’s covenant before the NC. However, both are Christ’s covenants—for they are ONE (
all the covenants are Christ’s administered historically in time according to His will).
Moreover, if you obliterate the truth of Abraham’s Seed, then you obliterate the truth of Christ’s Seed. Steve, are you of Abraham’s seed (Gal 3:7-9)? You will say you are “an heir of God through Christ” (Gal 4:7), however you need to see how this was unfolded in Galatians 4:19-31 (—in Abraham). If you obliterate Abraham’s Seed, then you indeed are preaching “another Gospel” not found in Scripture! If you are Abraham’s Seed, then his covenant continues—though in a fuller way in Christ!
JE stated,
The NC is NOT “brand new” it is the fulfilling of the OC (just because something is fulfilled does not mean it disappears! When a glass is filled with water, the glass does not cease to be a glass ). The OC is not replaced, but continues on in the fulfillment of the NC! Essentially, the reference in Hebrews 8:13 to the OC vanishing away is to the form and not to the substance. To understand it any different is to make a grave hermeneutical error.
------------------------------------------------------------
Steve replied,
With respect, not so! If I drink out of a paper cup, I drink once and then the cup has filfilled its purpose as a cup, so I throw it away. Even a glass or a pottery cup eventually breaks after continual use; then again, it has fulfilled its purpose and can be discarded.
Where before you were using a
dispensational hermeneutic, now your
dispensational theology has surfaced. You are speaking now of totally “different cups” (cups = covenants) and the “cups themselves” breaking. This is erroneous theology—
dispensational to the core (more on this below). In addition, you have made God the Creator of imperfect covenants (pl.).
However, in opposition to this, the “Covenant” is ONE and it is PERFECT, proceeding through redemptive history and being “fulfilled” (
but not obliterated) in Christ (PERFECT here means that it was from God whose covenants are holy, just, and good and thus PERFECT. This ONE Covenant progressed (became fuller, more revealed, and thus better) until the NC arrived and thus there was a progressive revelation of ONE covenant). The OC itself was not insufficient, rather the people trying to keep it were (Rom 8:3). An individual breaking the covenant of God within the OC (or the NC—Heb 6, 10), does not make the covenant(s) “sinful” or “wrong.”
Steve said,
So the Old Covenant has fulfilled its purpose by introducing the New Covenant and is now finished. As it is written, ‘He takes away the first that He may establish the second’ (Heb 10:9 ). “Oh but He hasn’t really taken away the old covenant, He’s just amended it a little!” That’s not what the text says. Read it again. Read it from verse 5. You are forcing your presuppositions upon the sacred text.
Once again you speak of “totally” different covenants. Once again you do NOT see ONE covenant progressing through redemptive history. Steve if you pinch a text from here and another from there you can make the Bible say whatever you desire it to (
Spoof-texting). However, look at Heb 10 IN CONTEXT of the WHOLE book of Hebrews. Christ is the “fulfillment” of the OC. This is what “takes away the first” means. If they were “completely obliterated” then Heb 11 (the faith chapter) would not need to follow Heb 1-10 as an “example” of faith today (
but why if it is obliterated). The NC is a “fulfillment” of the OC not its “complete obliteration.”
So what of the OC has disappeared? Well, the Temple has gone, the priesthood has gone, the sacrifices have gone, the ceremonial laws have gone, the dietry laws have gone. They are all fulfilled in Christ.
YES…., but what continues on in the OC is fulfilled in Christ since it is ONE covenant. There is a continuance of the OC in Christ. Yes, its shadows and types have gone, but they ARE SEEN in Christ and in His administration—they are fulfilled (and being fulfilled) and thus continue on—the OC continues on in the NC (of course, there is continuity/discontinuity).
Steve said,
Even the moral law, as something that condemns me, has gone.
The law can still condemn you NOW (
temporarily, not eternally). It is still possible to speak evil of the law (Jam 4:11). We still have church discipline. It is still possible to be condemned (
temporarily, not eternally) because the Christian can still sin (I John 4:20-21). What does the Holy Spirit use to convict you TODAY of sin, righteousness, and judgment? Jesus did not come to destroy the law, but “fulfill” it (Matt 5:17). News Flash, Christians don’t always say, feel, or obey your hermeneutic of, “Oh, how I love Your law! It is my meditation all the day!’ and, ‘His commandments are not grievous.”
JE stated,
The promise was: "they shall be my people, and I will be their God" (Jer 24:7).
------------------------------------------------------------
Steve replied,
Yes, but the people of God are different under the NC than in the OC.
Dispensationalism once AGAIN (and I am not using the term hermeneutic here). Steve was the church in the OT? As Gerstner states, “According to Dispensationalism, Israel and the church are different in almost everyway.” According to Steve, “the people of God are different under the NC than in the OC.” Gerstner adds, “The dispensational distinction between Israel and the church implicitly repudiates the Christian way of salvation…. If these are two different types of people, how can they have the same salvation?” Grace2u YOU are preaching another gospel—dispensationalism!
Steve said,
When Paul writes to the church at Corinth, he is writing, ‘To those who are (better ‘have been’) sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all who in every place call on the Name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours.’ He knows nothing of an visible/invisible church; everyone to whom he is writing is a saint.
Everyone who was a member of the Corinthian Church (or any other church) Paul wrote to was clearly not among the elect. The Corinthian Church had numerous sins in their midst; division, fornication (1 Cor 7), drunkenness, calling Jesus accursed (1 Cor 12:3), etc. and for anyone to assume for a moment that “everyone” of these Corinthians (without exception) were elect is truly presumptive and unscriptural. Paul did not know who the elect were, if so why would he call election a mystery (Rom 9-11)? Have you read 2 Cor 13:5? Compare Rom 1:1-7 with Rom 16:17-18, etc.
Romans 1:1-7 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, which he promised afore through his prophets in the holy scriptures, concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we received grace and apostleship, unto obedience of faith among all the nations, for his name's sake; among whom are ye also called to be Jesus Christ's: To all that are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Rom 16:17-18 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Christ, but their own belly; and by their smooth and fair speech they beguile the hearts of the innocent.
What you have done is actually PROVE that there is a visible/invisible church distinction. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bravo.gif" alt="" />
