DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Religious Convictions
HTML https://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Religious Discussions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 428--------------------------------------------------
Covenants
By: Kerry Date: December 14, 2014, 9:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A covenant is the merging of two beings in some way, so that the
two identities are tied together. In Israel, this change of
identities was often shown by a change in names. Thus we see
Sarah and Abraham's names being changed; and although we are not
told explicitly that the covenant was with Sarah as well as with
Abraham, the change in name shows it was.
Compare that to Paul's saying the Christian is a different
person, a new creature.
A covenant always involved blood as well. In ancient times, the
practice in the Middle East was sometimes similar to that of the
American natives when they became "blood brothers" by cutting
themselves and exchanging blood. Over time, most human
covenants in the Middle East began to involve shedding the blood
of animals; but it was still meant to mean that the parties to
the covenant were swearing by their own blood, by their own
lives -- for the life is in the blood.
Circumcision of the Abrahamic covenant also involved the
shedding of blood. If a Gentile has been circumcised already
and wishes to convert to Judaism, it is still required to cut
enough that at least one drop of blood is drawn.
I do not need to inform anyone that the "New Covenant" as
instituted by Jesus involved his own blood. What some may not
know and may doubt is that it also involves the blood of the
person who enters into the covenant with Jesus. Indeed, in
the Body of Christ, all share the same Body and Blood. We cease
owning what used to be "ourselves." Again referring to Paul,
we are "bought with a price." We become Jesus' property by the
terms of the agreement.
What was the punishment for breaking a covenant? First of all,
you were sinning against both yourself and all the other parties
to the covenant. Since your identity is part of the whole and
not self alone, you sin against self as a member of the body.
The penalty was death and being "cut off." The blood of the
person was contaminated from breaking the covenant, and his
blood would be on himself. The blood of Israel formed by the
covenant of all Israel with God could not help him. In the
Bible, we sometimes see this being enforced by hacking the
person into pieces. Sometimes it was being fed to animals or
birds.
So is there any punishment for breaking the New Covenant with
Jesus? Yes, there is. As one early Church Father put it,
Jesus became man so that man could become God. When we make
covenant with Jesus, something of the Divine is imparted to us.
What would the penalty be if we despise that and soil it
knowingly and deliberately? I wouldn't say necessarily eternal
damnation, but I would say such a person will be cut off at
least in part and pay for his own sins. Jesus may not cut
someone off all at once; but if Jesus helped someone stop being
an alcholic and that person then returns to the bottle, I say
Jesus will not help him master the same problem again. Jesus
may still help him with other things, but don't count on being
helped twice with someone -- don't be like the dog returning to
its vomit. It is also treading on thin ice to pile up an array
of sins since at some point, Jesus may give up. He owns his
servants. They are his property. If he imparted part of
himself to someone, surely he has the right to determine what
happens to that part of his own being. The person who believes
he can behave independently of Jesus is risking quite a bit.
Some people get frightened when they read about not having
further forgiveness. Note Mark carefully phrases it, saying the
person who offends the Spirit will not be forgiven but is "in
danger of" eternal punishment. He will bear his own sins; and
I believe we can offend the Spirit in a single matter and have
to pay ourselves, or perhaps in a host of areas where we will
have to pay. Hebrews tells us too that after receiving the
knowledge of the truth, there is "no more sacrifice for sin."
That is right. Jesus is not going pay twice to save us from
sin. If he cured us of the urge to be an alcoholic, don't
expect him to do it again.
That is trampling on the blood of Christ, as if he died so we
could abuse the gift of grace by sinning willfully and knowingly
after he has shown us better and rescued us out of alcoholism.
Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received
the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice
for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery
indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or
three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought
worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath
counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified,
an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?
30 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me,
I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall
judge his people.
Again, we ought to read that as a threat of eternal perdition.
It doesn't say that. It says God will judge. God is still not
willing that any should perish; but if He tried it with us the
easy way by giving us mercy and wisdom and the ability to escape
a sin, we should not count on Him giving us the opportunity to
trample on the blood of Christ again, adding offense upon
offense. We will have to pay ourselves for those sins Jesus
already helped us master once. If we do not, we are right to
have a "fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation."
We may be turned over to the tormentors until we have paid for
ourselves if we despise the Blood of Christ which is meant to
give life and pull us up out of the filth.
It is foolish however to talk about the "unpardonable sin." The
Bible doesn't call it that. What it says is that the person
will not forgiven. "Their blood shall be upon them." Let them
pay with their own blood. If they don't like that idea, God
will judge.
#Post#: 437--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Helen Date: December 14, 2014, 3:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote] Indeed, in the Body of Christ, all share the same Body
and Blood. We cease owning what used to be "ourselves." Again
referring to Paul, we are "bought with a price." We become
Jesus' property by the terms of the agreement.
[/quote]
Amen..but how quickly we forget!! We are not our own.
Yet, I don't see things quite how you do. IF I had made a
covenant with Jesus, or IF I had made a covenant with God...yet
I could could by cut off for breaking it...but I didn't, and you
didn't .
" For when God made promise to Abraham, because He could swear
by no greater, He sware by Himself, 14 saying, Surely blessing I
will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee. 15 And
so, after he ( Abraham) had patiently endured, he obtained the
promise. 16 For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for
confirmation is to them an end of all strife. 17 Wherein God,
willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the
immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath: 18 that by
two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie,
we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to
lay hold upon the hope set before us: 19 which hope we have as
an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which
entereth into that within the veil; 20 whither the forerunner is
for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after
the order of Melchisedec.
As I read the NT I see that God...knowing we are but dust...cut
the new covenant with Himself..the Lord Jesus Christ. God and
the Son cut covenant in our stead...we keep the covenant in
Christ...we cannot keep it...it took God 4000 years to get man
to finally see and believe that!
That's why the Covenant is so precious to us. ...and the very
reason we are told " in everything give thanks.." we have much
to be thankful for!
Just my two cents on it..
#Post#: 440--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Kerry Date: December 15, 2014, 7:12 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The "new covenant" was promised to be made with Israel.
Jeremiah 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I
will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the
house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers
in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the
land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an
husband unto them, saith the Lord:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the
house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my
law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and
will be their God, and they shall be my people.
If you have offered all your life's blood to Jesus as he did for
you, then you've made covenant. The person who does that
obtains certain privileges too. The same chapter of Jeremiah
also says:
15 Thus saith the Lord; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation,
and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be
comforted for her children, because they were not.
16 Thus saith the Lord; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and
thine eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the
Lord; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy.
17 And there is hope in thine end, saith the Lord, that thy
children shall come again to their own border.
Matthew quotes this passage; but what does he mean by it?
Jacob also made covenant with God; and along with him, so did
Rachel. Rachel was ready to sacrifice anything and everything
she had. She tolerated the interference of her father with her
marriage to Jacob. He tolerated Leah and the other two. She
wanted peace in the family. She also did not want to see Jacob
enter the Holy Land with two sisters as wives. In the end, she
died, being willing to give her all. This earned her the title
of "Mother of all Israel." She and Jacob were one, and they
were also one with God.
Think you that God would allow Rachel to weep then for nothing?
Could God tell her, "You love those people more than I do?" Of
course not. To please the Divine Nature imparted to her, God
Himself had to answer her prayers of intercession.
We see also God "remembering" Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob when
their offspring were suffering in Egypt. God's intervention
then was on their account, because of the covenants they had
made with Him.
The person who makes covenant with God puts God in the position
where He must act to save the people that person loves.
Hebrews says Jesus is the "mediator" of the covenant between God
and man.
Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry,
by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which
was established upon better promises.
Jesus is "between" God and men.
#Post#: 444--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Helen Date: December 15, 2014, 10:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Well Kerry, If our Covenant with God is based on us keeping it
then we are all totally lost.
It is either between God and His Son in our stead or we may as
well eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die.
#Post#: 447--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Kerry Date: December 15, 2014, 12:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Helen link=topic=38.msg444#msg444 date=1418661737]
Well Kerry, If our Covenant with God is based on us keeping it
then we are all totally lost. [/quote]
Jesus did the hard part; and he also gave us the Spirit to guide
us, the Power of God to help us, and everything else we need to
do our part.
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to
become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
All he asks if that we act as lights in this world, sharing the
Light we received from him and that we love one another. If we
cannot do that, there is no excuse.
[quote]It is either between God and His Son in our stead or we
may as well eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we
die.[/quote]
The Good Book says the new covenant is between God and Israel.
The person who wants to give Jesus nothing back in return is
like the servant who buried his talent in the earth. The way we
are repay Jesus is to love one another so the whole world comes
into the kingdom. He does not want us to pay him back
personally. How could we do that anyway? He wants us to help
him move the whole world into the Light.
#Post#: 449--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Amadeus Date: December 15, 2014, 12:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=38.msg447#msg447
date=1418667971]
Jesus did the hard part; and he also gave us the Spirit to guide
us, the Power of God to help us, and everything else we need to
do our part.
......
The person who wants to give Jesus nothing back in return is
like the servant who buried his talent in the earth. The way we
are repay Jesus is to love one another so the whole world comes
into the kingdom. He does not want us to pay him back
personally. How could we do that anyway? He wants us to help
him move the whole world into the Light.
[/quote]
[font=courier]I think I am with you down the line on this DM.
Each of us is called, (probably called more than once) to do a
part, but as you say God has provided or will provide
"everything else we need to do our part" [/font]
#Post#: 450--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: A nonny mouse Date: December 15, 2014, 2:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=38.msg447#msg447
date=1418667971]
The Good Book says the new covenant is between God and Israel.
[/quote]
Does not Romans 9 suggest that the Covenant that was with those
who were Israelites by national birthright was the 'Old
Covenant', whereas the 'New Covenant' was with those who became
'Israelites' by a spiritual birth of faith.
#Post#: 451--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Kerry Date: December 15, 2014, 3:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=38.msg450#msg450
date=1418676652]
Does not Romans 9 suggest that the Covenant that was with those
who were Israelites by national birthright was the 'Old
Covenant', whereas the 'New Covenant' was with those who became
'Israelites' by a spiritual birth of faith.
[/quote]Paul might put it with the wild olive branches that were
grafted onto the natural tree as well as with the natural tree,
to the Jew first, etc.
You mention the "spiritual birth." I would say that signifies
the death of the old person with a new identity being given when
accepted into the Body of Christ. This change of identity also
shows how a covenant works. Paul continues the parallel saying
branches can be cut off.
Romans 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off,
that I might be grafted in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou
standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he
also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them
which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou
continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
This is fairly typical Jewish thinking. The person is "cut off"
-- it's called karet or kareth. Different Rabbis have different
views of course. I think Rabbi Schneur Zalman has it right.
He agrees with Paul, saying that the connections can and will
be repaired; but while the person is karet, he is cut off from
God.
HTML http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1340046/jewish/Can-Someone-Be-Cut-Off-From-G-d.htm
#Post#: 452--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: A nonny mouse Date: December 15, 2014, 3:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=38.msg451#msg451
date=1418678214]
Yes, or as Paul might put it, with the wild olive branches that
were grafted onto the natural tree.
[/quote]
Yes....makes me wonder (yet again) whether the apostolic writers
might not have been 'scratching about in Human darkness' as they
tried to describe the will and intent of God.
And that it was the 'Church' which invented Papal infallibility
that also fudged apostolic writings into scriptural
infallibility to suit their introduction of 'Bibliolatry'.
#Post#: 453--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Kerry Date: December 15, 2014, 8:45 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=38.msg452#msg452
date=1418679722]
Yes....makes me wonder (yet again) whether the apostolic writers
might not have been 'scratching about in Human darkness' as they
tried to describe the will and intent of God.[/quote]
Paul makes me wonder in some other places; but I find him in
line with other Scriptures when he speaks about the tree like
that. Man is a tree, Moses said. The kingdom of Heaven is
like a mustard seed that grows to become a tree. The tree that
doesn't bear fruit is hewn down. The prophets think similarly
and use the concept of "tree" to convey something about men.
When the Bible speaks about trees, sometimes it means a single
person, sometimes the collective Man -- Adam Kadmon to the Jews,
the Body of Christ to Christians. In other places, it's a vine.
When Jesus said he was the Vine, that means we are to be like
grapes growing by remaining connected to him -- the way babies
are connected to their mothers in the womb. The true
understanding of being "born of the Spirit" can be derived by
thinking of what happens to grapes after they mature.
Paul's idea is similar to the Jewish concept of the righteous
Gentiles too. Jews believe it is not necessary for Gentiles to
convert to their religion, and the righteous Gentiles will live
next to Jews in the Kingdom.
The idea of grafting on of Gentiles and incorporating them into
Israel is also a common idea in the Old Testament. The whole
purpose of Israel was for them to act as intercessors for the 70
nations. That is found in several places in the Old
Testament.
Indeed the Jew cannot enter the eternal rest unless he has
fulfilled his role. If the Gentiles don't make it into the
kingdom, he can't. That does not need to be done by converting
them. What is necessary for Gentiles, according to the Jews, is
that they obey the provisions of the Noahic Covenant. Those
terms are very close to the provisions the Apostles set out in
the book of Acts. The Gentile must obey his conscience -- and
Paul again is referring to the Noahic Covenant when he said when
the Gentiles do the things of the law, they are a law unto
themselves, etc.
[quote]And that it was the 'Church' which invented Papal
infallibility that also fudged apostolic writings into
scriptural infallibility to suit their introduction of
'Bibliolatry'.[/quote]I would say how to read the Scriptures got
lost early. There are many ways tares can be down with the
wheat. Unspiritual men became their leaders, and it became the
blind leading the blind. They fell into the same error the
"letter of the law" Jews had fallen into. When others
disagreed, they became dogmatic and aggressive, insisting they
were right and then nullifying many of the Scriptures with their
traditions.
This reached the height of folly when they gave up on the Holy
Spirit to guide them. If different Bishops had different ideas,
they did not trust the Holy Spirit to help them iron out their
differences. They decided to hold councils and vote and then
cast out the losers as heretics. In more than one case, these
early councils were rigged. The Council of Hiera declared
itself an ecumenical councils and had voted unanimously to
condemn icons. That was because the Emperor then wanted them
to. When the Empress Irene came to the throne, she was very
pro-icons. So they called another council. That didn't go too
well because people attacked the church they were in, so they
stopped proceedings there and moved to Nicea again -- far from
the madding crowd. On the first day, three Bishops who had
voted against icons before rose to give their abject apologies
and to recant the error of their ways. Four days later more
Bishops were admitted after they also recanted their views.
Naturally the vote was unanimous again but in favor of icons
this time. This was proclaimed as the "triumph of Orthodoxy."
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page