2 Covenants: Promise and Law

[phil36]

We see from the beginings with God dealing with His people 2 covenants, one with Abraham and one at sinai (with Moses on behalf of the people).

What are the distinguishing factors between the 2 covenants?

Phil

 

[superdave5221]

We see from the beginings with God dealing with His people 2 covenants, one with Abraham and one at sinai (with Moses on behalf of the people).

What are the distinguishing factors between the 2 covenants?

Phil

Hey Phil. Actually there were many covenants in the bible. God had covenants with Adam, Noah, and many with Abraham, as well as Moses, and the New Covanant which is between Jesus and His church. Much confusion in doctrine exists because people do not separate these covenants and try to combine them. For example, the ten commandments and the Law was between the nation of Israel and God and had nothing to do with Gentiles at all. And yet, people continue to try to bind that law, in particular keeping the Sabbath, onto the Gentiles.

Acts 15: 8 "And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us; 9 and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. 10 "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear ?

Some of this confusion has to do with the Greek term which is translated "everlasting". This term is sometimes translated "forever" and sometimes "everlasting". The term can mean either one, depending on context. "Everlasting" does not mean forever, but until the end of an age or dispensation. For example, the Mosaic covenant, which was an everlasting covenant between God and His people Israel, lasted until the end of the Mosaic dispensation, which ended when Christ died on the cross. As a further example, the Levitical priesthood, (which was everlasting), established under the Mosaic Covenant has been abolished, and replaced by the Melchizedek prieisthood which will last forever.

Hebrews 7: 11 Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law ), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron ? 12 For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also.

Hebrews 5: 5 So also Christ did not glorify Himself so as to become a high priest, but He who said to Him, "YOU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU"; 6 just as He says also in another passage, "YOU ARE A PRIEST FOREVER ACCORDING TO THE ORDER OF MELCHIZEDEK."

In the above, the Greek term is translated "forever", and rightly so. Notice the following:

Deuteronomy 5: 33 "You shall walk in all the way which the LORD your God has commanded you, that you may live and that it may be well with you, and that you may prolong your days in the land which you will possess.

Notice that God speaks of prolonging the days of Israel in the land. It was given unto them as an "everlasting" possession. Then how can that be prolonged, if it is forever? It is until the end of the age, which ended at the cross. Israel has no further claims to any earthly lands in the future.

Now as to your question about differences between the Mosaic covenant and the New covanant, they are many. The Mosaic covanant was a legal system. A legal system, by design, can only condemn and punish those who don't keep it's statutes completely, (Deuteronomy 27:26). A legal system cannot save a person. It demands perfection, which is unattainable to humans by works.

The law of liberty, which we enjoy under the New Covanant is a law of faith.

Acts 26: 18 to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.'

Romans 8: 1 Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. 3 For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4 so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God ; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. 10 If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.

Unlike the Levitical priests who died, Jesus is a great high priest who lives forever, and always makes intercession to God for us.

Hebrews 2: 17 Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

The law has made us aware that we cannot save ourselves. We need God to save us. God planned from the beginning to do so. God devised a great plan of redemption to save us, because He loved us. The entire bible is a history of that plan. God planned a work, and worked His plan!! Jesus carried out that plan and died for us. The law makes us aware of our need for Him, and our faith in Him allows us to be found blameless before God.

 

[phil36]

Hi superdave,

You are correct there are many Covenants. The so called covenant works with Adam in Eden (not all scholars agree on this). Noah, Abraham, Sinai , we see it Joshua 24, we see another one with David.. etc.

That is not what I meant, I also didn't mean that both the covenant with Abraham and Sinai, where in Genesis, I said beginnings.. this was the building of the nation, first with Abraham then.....Moses.

I was wondering why you concentrated solely on the Siniatic covenant? What I am looking for is the elements of the covenant treaty itself, what are the main Factors? what makes, one type different from the other. I will give you an example, the covenant with David is similar to Abraham..why is that.. what makes these different from the covenant at Sinai.. plus we shouldn't forget the covenant given to Israel at Sinai was also grace! This was God marking out His people, marking them from the surrounding Nations.

So just how different are the Abrahamic and Siniatic covenants?

For the Abrahamic covenant, Genesis 15 is very important to see the difference.

When you discuss the temporal basis of the covenant of Law, we can no way say the same for the Abrahamic covenant. This is plain if you read: Gen 12:1-3; 15 and in 17; John 8; Gal 3 and 4 . as you will see Salvation was always by Faith, now we have Faith in Christ.

To answer the question, you have to ask yourself.. what is a covenant?


Phil

 

[superdave5221]

Hi superdave,

You are correct there are many Covenants. The so called covenant works with Adam in Eden (not all scholars agree on this). Noah, Abraham, Sinai , we see it Joshua 24, we see another one with David.. etc.

That is not what I meant, I also didn't mean that both the covenant with Abraham and Sinai, where in Genesis, I said beginnings.. this was the building of the nation, first with Abraham then.....Moses.

I was wondering why you concentrated solely on the Siniatic covenant? What I am looking for is the elements of the covenant treaty itself, what are the main Factors? what makes, one type different from the other. I will give you an example, the covenant with David is similar to Abraham..why is that.. what makes these different from the covenant at Sinai.. plus we shouldn't forget the covenant given to Israel at Sinai was also grace! This was God marking out His people, marking them from the surrounding Nations.

So just how different are the Abrahamic and Siniatic covenants?


For the Abrahamic covenant, Genesis 15 is very important to see the difference.

When you discuss the temporal basis of the covenant of Law, we can no way say the same for the Abrahamic covenant. This is plain if you read: Gen 12:1-3; 15 and in 17; John 8; Gal 3 and 4 . as you will see Salvation was always by Faith, now we have Faith in Christ.

To answer the question, you have to ask yourself.. what is a covenant?


Phil

A covenant is an agreement, a contract if you will between two or more parties. Covenants between humans usually are proposed to benefit both parties. Covenants between God and people are slightly different. With God, God is the benefactor, the other parties are beneficiaries. There may or may not be conditions that have to be met, there are promises made, and there may or may not be mediators between the parties, and there may or may not be tokens provided.

These will now be outlined:

Abrahamic Covenant:

Beneficiaries: Abraham and all of his descendants (Genesis 17:7).

Conditions: Abraham must travel to the new land. (Genesis 12:1).
Beneficiaries must walk before God blameless. (Genesis 17:1).
Abraham must show his faith by offering Isaac as a burnt offering. (Genesis 22:2).

Promises: God will make of Abraham a great nation, and all nations will be blessed through his offspring. (Genesis 12: 2-3). This blessing will be found in Galatians 3 to be Christ, and His redemptive act for all nations, Gentile and Jew alike.

Mediator: None

Token: Circumcision (Genesis 17: 10-14)


The Law (Siniatic Covenant):

Beneficiaries: All Israel. (Exodus 34:27; Deuteronomy 5: 1-3).

Conditions: The ten commandments + all statutes and judgements pertaining to private, social, and religious life. (Exodus 20 through Deuteronomy).

Promises: Israel shall be a nation of priests and a holy nation. (Exodus 19: 5-6).
God will provide temporal benefits such as good harvests, safety and peace, respect, growth in number, and be provided with His presense. (Deuteronomy 26)

Mediator: Moses. (Deuteronomy 5:5)

Token: Sabbath. (Exodus 31: 12-17; Ezekiel 20: 12,20)

The above outline adapted from the book "How to Understand The Bible", by Robert Palmer. College Press Publishing Co. 1995, pp. 98-99.

 

[phil36]

Thats good superdave, But who takes on the obligations in each of the covenant types?

The covenants as we now kinow, and would have been the norm in the Patriarch age and following, was the suzerainty covenant.

This would be between a king and vassel or vassel state.

Did Abraham take on the obligations? or did God(more like a Royal grant) also inline with the suzerainty treaty, the two parties would cut an animal in half and walk through it, this pointed to the fact that if anyone broke this covenant they would be as the animal! (All this is well documented in History). Now read the promise to Abraham in Chapter 12 then especially 15, what is so striking about chapter 15? who is taking on the obligation in this covenant, who is walking throught the cut open animal? this is where the Semitic peoples and Israelite get the saying 'To cut an Oath'.

It is a suzerainty treaty but however, God is saying this land I will give you, your seed will be many (culminating in the Christ), I will bless you. btu there is no...if you don't do this you will end up as the cut open animal.. God himself takes on the obligation to carry this out, He Himself walks through the cut open animal' as if to say if all this that I have promised you doesn't happen, then this will happen to me. Of course God is all Truth so we know that this will never happen, but Abraham was a pagan, a polytheist (Josh 24:2f). This is how God communicated His relationship to His people, this is a form that Abraham knew, that the Israelites at the foot of Mt Sinai knew and would understand.

understanding these differences, and what a covenant treaty is really helps our understanding of God's dealings with His people, the Abrahamic covenant was promissory and all dependant on God, as was the covenant with Noah it was all God, as with the Davidic covenant, these are the everlasting covenants.

But look closely to the covenant at Sinai, who takes the obligations, along with prosperity and the land? it is not God, but the people, and if they fail what will happen?

Anyhow, I am sure everyone has their own ideas,

What you posted was good Dave and gives an idea of what is being done. but the covenants are a suzerainty treaty style, with direct commands and royal grants. I have understood the bible like you would not believe once I read this wel its all Old news but it was new to me, just I hadn't been taught it, don't think preachers have hours or whether people would sit for hours to listen lol.

In Contrast, who takes on the obligations at Mt Sinai? The Israelite's did. there where cursings and blessings not found in the covenant treaty with Abraham or David.

It is important for we can see the development of God's Plans throughout history from this suzerainty treaty/Royal grant with Abraham to Christ and the New Jerusalem. How God is always steadfast to His people because of Abraham.

If any one has read the Old Testament and taken note of what is being said you will see this as a running theme throughout. It is upon this the Israelites cry out, it is because of the promise God says, ' because of the promise I made with Abraham' etc it is God's loyalty to His promise (Steadfastness) that He looks after Israel not because of theirs, they fail and fail and fail... but God in His covenant Loyalty which He undertook with Abraham shows His love for His people.

Phil

 

[superdave5221]

Thats good superdave, But who takes on the obligations in each of the covenant types?

The covenants as we now kinow, and would have been the norm in the Patriarch age and following, was the suzerainty covenant.

This would be between a king and vassel or vassel state.

Did Abraham take on the obligations? or did God(more like a Royal grant) also inline with the suzerainty treaty, the two parties would cut an animal in half and walk through it, this pointed to the fact that if anyone broke this covenant they would be as the animal! (All this is well documented in History). Now read the promise to Abraham in Chapter 12 then especially 15, what is so striking about chapter 15? who is taking on the obligation in this covenant, who is walking throught the cut open animal? this is where the Semitic peoples and Israelite get the saying 'To cut an Oath'.

It is a suzerainty treaty but however, God is saying this land I will give you, your seed will be many (culminating in the Christ), I will bless you. btu there is no...if you don't do this you will end up as the cut open animal.. God himself takes on the obligation to carry this out, He Himself walks through the cut open animal' as if to say if all this that I have promised you doesn't happen, then this will happen to me. Of course God is all Truth so we know that this will never happen, but Abraham was a pagan, a polytheist (Josh 24:2f). This is how God communicated His relationship to His people, this is a form that Abraham knew, that the Israelites at the foot of Mt Sinai knew and would understand.

understanding these differences, and what a covenant treaty is really helps our understanding of God's dealings with His people, the Abrahamic covenant was promissory and all dependant on God, as was the covenant with Noah it was all God, as with the Davidic covenant, these are the everlasting covenants.

But look closely to the covenant at Sinai, who takes the obligations, along with prosperity and the land? it is not God, but the people, and if they fail what will happen?

Anyhow, I am sure everyone has their own ideas,

What you posted was good Dave and gives an idea of what is being done. but the covenants are a suzerainty treaty style, with direct commands and royal grants. I have understood the bible like you would not believe once I read this wel its all Old news but it was new to me, just I hadn't been taught it, don't think preachers have hours or whether people would sit for hours to listen lol.

In Contrast, who takes on the obligations at Mt Sinai? The Israelite's did. there where cursings and blessings not found in the covenant treaty with Abraham or David.

It is important for we can see the development of God's Plans throughout history from this suzerainty treaty/Royal grant with Abraham to Christ and the New Jerusalem. How God is always steadfast to His people because of Abraham.

If any one has read the Old Testament and taken note of what is being said you will see this as a running theme throughout. It is upon this the Israelites cry out, it is because of the promise God says, ' because of the promise I made with Abraham' etc it is God's loyalty to His promise (Steadfastness) that He looks after Israel not because of theirs, they fail and fail and fail... but God in His covenant Loyalty which He undertook with Abraham shows His love for His people.

Phil

I see what you are saying, I think? But the theme that is present throughout the entire bible is redemption. The Israelites may have taken on the obligations at Mt. Sinai, however God knew beforehand that they could not keep the agreement. That was part of His plan!! Their failure in being able to keep the Law should have made them aware of the need for God to provide a means to atone for their sins. It should have pointed them towards Christ!

Romans 5: 20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase ; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

God actually took on the obligations for all covenants in the garden of eden when He promised Eve that her seed would bruise the head of the serpent. At that point God was beginning His great plan of redemption for all people that would culminate in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, as the blessing promised to Abraham for all nations. The things lost by failure to keep the Law were temporal. The blessings of the Abrahamic covenant are retained. For, as Abraham had faith that if he sacrificed his son Isaac, that God could and would raise him back to life, we have faith that God raised Jesus back to life after His death on the cross. We also demonstrate that faith at baptism, believing that we can die with Christ, the old carnal self dying, and be raised as a new spiritual being in Christ. And because Christ lived a perfect life, obeying the Law perfectly, and died as a spotless sacrifice for our sins, we can walk blameless before God.

 

[phil36]

I see what you are saying, I think? But the theme that is present throughout the entire bible is redemption. The Israelites may have taken on the obligations at Mt. Sinai, however God knew beforehand that they could not keep the agreement. That was part of His plan!! Their failure in being able to keep the Law should have made them aware of the need for God to provide a means to atone for their sins. It should have pointed them towards Christ!

Romans 5: 20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase ; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

God actually took on the obligations for all covenants in the garden of eden when He promised Eve that her seed would bruise the head of the serpent. At that point God was beginning His great plan of redemption for all people that would culminate in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, as the blessing promised to Abraham for all nations. The things lost by failure to keep the Law were temporal. The blessings of the Abrahamic covenant are retained. For, as Abraham had faith that if he sacrificed his son Isaac, that God could and would raise him back to life, we have faith that God raised Jesus back to life after His death on the cross. We also demonstrate that faith at baptism, believing that we can die with Christ, the old carnal self dying, and be raised as a new spiritual being in Christ. And because Christ lived a perfect life, obeying the Law perfectly, and died as a spotless sacrifice for our sins, we can walk blameless before God.

The theme from the Fall is redemption I agree. However, the manner in which God uses is suzerainty agreement. It is how the agreement is formed. God did not take the obligations for the covenant of Law with Israel at Sinai. I am not talking about the nature of the Sinaitic covenant and how the Israelites outwork this or failed should we say. but the form of the covenant itself.

Maybe that is a better way of putting it.. The actual form of the covenant, its elements and obligations. why did God walk through the cut in half animal in Gen 15? Why is that there, what has it got to do with the covenant?

what is different between, the Abrahamic covenant and the Siniatic covenant.. before you answer I am not talking about the Law. I am talking about how these covenants where offered and the forms and element s of the covenant? I know from the Fall onwards is redemptive history, but what is the framework which God works out His plan... you would be foolish to say it was something other than covenant. Yet there are distinctions in the pact...

Did God promise anything to Abraham before he asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac? how can you account for gen 12 & 15, if the covenant was dependent on Abraham's actions? even the sign of the covenant was given before the birth of Isaac (Gen 17). you say it as though the covenant was only dpendant on Abrahams works? yet Abraham was already righteous, because of his Faith, yet God tested him even further to which Abraham pass with flying colours.

But please read Genesis very carefully and you will see that the covenant has already been given to Abraham and his seed, before the birth of Isaac, yet Ishmael was alive and kicking but he was not of the promise to which God had given to Abraham. Why was Ishmael not included? you may say because it was not Sari's son, this is half correct. He is rejected because he was born out of mistrust in God. God had told Abraham that he and Sarai would have a son, they mistrusted God. Thus Ishmael was rejected, for he was not in the line of seed that God Planned and no attempt by satan would thwart or interrupt God's plan in redemptive history regarding His promised seed (Christ)

Remember the point I think you have missed is the "cutting of an oath" in Genesis 15 this ratified the covenant and God took upon Himself the obligations as with Noah, but not with the covenant at Sinai! The Israelites took on the obligations as vassels to a suzerain (King) at the foot of Sinai (the King in this instance is God)

 

[pickles]

Ive liked reading this, brings to mind the scripture where it says God keeps all his promises.
Its helping with my question in my post on balance.
I see where alot is about promises, but also where the heart comes into the judgement, not just judgement of the heart his people, but the heart of God in His judgement.
Thankyou and God bless, pickles