Making sense of all the "covenants"

[8thdaypriest]

I've been trying to make sense of all the succeeding covenants through the Scriptures.  I know we call it the "New Testament", but it's actually a "new covenant".  But wasn't each covenant "new" to the persons with whom it was made?  And each "new" covenant did NOT annual, supplant, or replace the preceding one/s.  Each one builds on past covenants.   Each one is a fuller revelation of the purpose and plan of God. 

 
Covenants (All except the last one involved promises.)

1.  Creation Covenant (w. the day and the night - Sabbath, Marriage, Work, no-Tree of GE)

2.  C. Between Father and Son - “between them both”

3.  C. of vengaence - w. Adam (Seed to crush Serpent’s head.  Initiation of blood sacrifice.)

4.  C. of preservation - w. Noah and creation (Never destroy all flesh by water again. Sacrifice continued/no blood.)

5.  C. of possession - w. Abraham - circumcision (a type of blood sacrifice) the sign of - progeny and land promised, animal sacrifice continued.

6.  C. of Deliverance - Passover in Egypt

7.  C. of Nationhood - at Sinai - established nation of Israel, Marriage Covenant of betrothal -  continued promise of land/Seed. Added health/prosperity   /victory over enemies/peace IF obedient

7a. C. w. the priesthood - w. Aaron, Phinehas and descendants -  everlasting IF obedient (They were NOT.)

7b. C. Renewed with generation who crossed into land.  Type of the Consummation Covenant.

8. C. of Kingdom - w. David - Son to reign as King forever over united Israel, promise of land, etc. continued IF obedient

9.  C. of Restoration - w. those “in Christ” -  New Marriage Covenant of Betrothal -  Christ given  "as a covenant" - would (in future) bring fulfillment of all previous promises.  Priesthood continued as Melchizedek.  Sacrifice as Christ.  Circumcision as heart and one day in flesh (transformation at SC)

10.C. of Consummation  - fulfillment a reality.  "I will be you God, and you will be my people."  Consummation of marriage.  Made with redeemed Israel/Judah returned to the land (the greater "exodus" after a great resurrection).  (Jer 31, and Exek 36).

Each covenant is "new" in the sense that it introduces a fuller view of God's overarching plan, to "Separate a people for Himself".  Each "new" covenant does NOT annul, supplant or replace the preceding covenant/s.  Former covenants are not "old" in the sense of annulled or obsolete.  They are just "former" or "first". 

FORMS may change without annulling the entire covenant.  Eg: physical circumcision, animal blood/fire sacrifice, exclusive Aaronic priesthood, inheritance by descent (marriage to widowed sister-in law, marriage to rapist, no marriage in final kingdom), focus of worship moved to heavenly Jerusalem temporarily, 

The curse of the Abrahamic covenant - birds and beasts will eat your flesh - is seen in succeeding covenants and is finally seen in Revelation.

The curse of the Sinai Covenant - removal from the land - is seen again and again, finally finished as Gog-Magog. 

 

Individual participation in each covenant is dependent upon individual choice.  The individual may incur "wrath" or "the curse" without annulling the covenant entirely for others. 

 

I would like to know your thoughts on this. 

Paul said that those who are of faith ARE children of Abraham and will partake of the blessings of that covenant. 

SDA and others say that the Ten Words of the Sinai Covenant are still binding today. 

Paul wrote that uncircumcised Gentiles were "strangers from the covenants of promise" (Eph. 2:12) but now are "fellow citizens" of Israel, meaning they will partake of those covenant promises. 

 

I'm looking for Scripture proofs that FORMs (stipulated within covenants)  may be changed without nullifying those covenants.

 

Blessings,

Rachel Cory

Prophecy Viewpoint

 

[Gerr]

The Bible speaks of an "everlasting covenant".  The many covenants you mention are just historical contextualization of that one everlasting covenant.

[JoeMo]

Hi Rachel,

Your post is quite thought-provoking.  The first scriptures that come to mind concerning one covenant REPLACING (rather than augmenting) a previous covenant is in Hebrews 8: 7-13.  I'll  quote just verses 7 and 13:

"For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another...By calling this covenant “new,” he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and outdated will soon disappear."

 

2 Cor. 3: 7-11 also appears to "replace" one covenant with another (even to the point of calling the 10 Commandments a ministry of death) :

 

"Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, ⁸ will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious? ⁹ If the ministry that brought condemnation was glorious, how much more glorious is the ministry that brings righteousness! ¹⁰ For what was glorious has no glory now in comparison with the surpassing glory. ¹¹ And if what was transitory came with glory, how much greater is the glory of that which lasts!"

 

I will concede the possibility that, in context,  these verses may refer to the sacrificial system (See Hebrews 9); but it is easy to infer that the new covenant also replaces the way we look at compliance with the Law and salvation.

[8thdaypriest]

The Bible speaks of an "everlasting covenant".  The many covenants you mention are just historical contextualization of that one everlasting covenant.

The LORD's covenant with Abraham was called "everlasting".

His covenant with Israel was also termed "everlasting".

His covenant with the priesthood was also termed "everlasting".

His covenant with David was also termed "forever".

 

Marriage was commanded in the covenant with Adam, along with work (tending) and Sabbath.  But there will be "no marriage" after the SC. 

Animal sacrifice was commanded along with the Aaronic priesthood, but apparently they go away (they change form).

Physical circumcision was commanded Abraham and his descendants part of that covenant, and continued til (when?). 

 

It looks as if specific commands within the covenants change form. 

The sacrifice becomes Christ - because the first type was inadequate.

The priesthood goes back to the Melchizedek (which was older or primary).  This because the priesthood became corrupted, and was inadequate.

Physical circumcision (the type) is replaced by "the circumcision of Christ" (both heart and flesh- new spiritual body).

The Tabernacle/Temple is finally replaced by God and His Son, in the New Jerusalem.

 

I'm looking for Scripture proof that a change of FORM, is still considered within a covenant, not abolishing one covenant and replacing it with something different.

After all, we still claim the covenant promises.

But how can we claim the promises are still valid, if the covenant has been abolished.

 

It appears from Isa. and Zech. that the Feasts of the LORD will still be kept in the Kingdom of Messiah.

The redeemed will all go up to worship the LORD from one New Moon, and one Sabbath to another .

But those Sabbaths (Feasts - see Lev. 23) had commands attached to them, specifying certain sacrifices to be offered. 

How can one command still be valid, but another (right there with it) be changed?

 

The LORD - of course - has authority to change anything He wants.

But is not a change voiding THAT covenant?

[8thdaypriest]

There were faithful (at least mostly so) folks who lived under the Sinai Covenant, right down to John the Baptist's father Zechariah.

What happens to the people who were faithful (Joseph, Daniel, Job, etc) living under covenants now declared "obsolete". 

Does the LORD fulfill the promises to those faithful individuals, and then make a new covenant with other people, wherein He promises them "the land", health, peace, victory, etc ? 

 

The curse on the house of Eli certainly sounds like the LORD is going to "cut off" the Aaronic priesthood, and replace it with His own "faithful priest". 

He says to Eli, "your father's house" which would include Aaron (the father). 

 

    1 Samuel 2:30-35  “Therefore the LORD God of Israel says: `I said indeed that your house and the house of your father [Aaron] would walk before Me forever.'  But now the LORD says: ‘Far be it from Me; for those who honor Me I will honor, and those who despise Me shall be lightly esteemed.  Then He tells Eli that there will not be "an old man" (one old enough to serve as priest) in your house forever. 

 

Heb. 7:12 says "the priesthood being changed"  - that sounds like one is out, and another is in.

 

The legal grounds for establishing a "new covenant" would be that every descendant has reached the point of being "cut off".  The "full cup" principle. 

But there WERE faithful individuals still living in Israel, when Christ came.  EVERY individual had not reached terminal unrighteousness. 

 

We are talking about the whole "replacement theology" doctrine.

You know.

Replacing Israel with "the church".  I don't buy that one. 

 

So - back to the question:

How do you change elements of a covenant without invalidating the whole covenant?