Two Covenants, Not one 
vektek
14 y
1,836
Two Covenants, Not one
For the past three weeks, I've been sharing a three-part series of teachings on the "Sunday Preaching" broadcast called, "Two Covenants, Not One." For many years, I stayed confused when I read the Bible because I didn't understand this simple aspect of understanding the Scripture. The Old and New Covenant are very different from each other in many ways. God told those in the old covenant that a day was going to come when He would make a new covenant with His people and it would not be like the covenant He had made with them through their Fathers. (See Jeremiah 31:31-32) Through Jesus Christ, that day came to us so that now the covenant He has made is totally different - not at all the same. It's new and, according to Hebrews 8:13, the old one is "obsolete." It has passed away. It's gone, expired, finished, over!
This fact is a sticking point in many people's minds. "Isn't the Old Testament God's Word?" they will ask? Of course the Old Testament is as much a part of the Bible as the New Testament, but here's a key that will help us immeasurably when we understand it. The Old Testament was not written to us! It was written for us, but not to us. (See Romans 15:4) There's a big difference. That's why the Apostle Paul cautioned Timothy to take great care to ensure that he would "rightly divide the word of truth" when he taught the Bible. (See 2 Timothy 2:15) All kind of trouble is created in our minds and lives when we don't do that.
First of all, the Law was never even given to the Gentiles. It was given to Israel. Consider these texts:
These are the statutes, the ordinances, and the laws that the Lord gave between Himself and the children of Israel on Mount Sinai, by the hand of Moses” (Leviticus 26:46).
He tells His words to Jacob, His statutes and His judgments to Israel. He did not do so to any nation … (Psalm 147:19-20).
For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves. . . (Romans 2:14).
Christians today put themselves in a confusing cycle of condemnation when they try to apply an Old Covenant mentality to understanding the Bible. The New and the Old don’t mix!
Example: Do you believe your heart is desperately wicked and deceitful above all things? If you do, its' because you've failed to "rightly divide the word." God had Jeremiah tell the people that “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked" (Jeremiah 17:9) but in Romans 5:5 Paul said that "the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts." Which is true? They both are! It was true when Jeremiah said it to those to whom He spoke in the Old Covenant and Paul's words are true for we who live under the New Covenant! Do you see the confusion that happens when we fail to make the distinction between the covenants? There are many biblical texts like that. When we read the Bible, we need to ask ourselves, "Who is speaking? To whom is he speaking? When is He speaking?" These are basic questions that will settle a lot of confusion in reading the Bible.
Remember this: The new covenant doesn't start at Matthew 1:1. It starts at the death of Jesus. The importance of this fact can't be overstated. Hebrews 9:16 says, " For where a testament is, there must of necessity be the death of him that made it." In other words, a Last Will & Testament means nothing until the person who wrote it dies. That's important even when we read the New Testament pages.
For instance, you'll get yourself into a world of confusion if you try to apply the Sermon on the Mount to yourself. Remember that Jesus hadn't died when He spoke those words. He was talking to them, not you. They were a group of people who thought they could gain righteousness by their moral living so Jesus showed them just how impossible that is. He said things like, "If you lust, gouge your eye out. If you steal, cut your hand off." So here's the question: Do you really believe that's what you're supposed to do? "Of course not!" a critic might respond, "It was obvious He didn't really mean that!" Wait, a minute. If you claim that we're supposed to do everything Jesus said, you can't take that cop-out. The Bible isn't a menu you can choose from.
The fact is that if we don't rightly divide the covenants, we will end up treating the Bible like a buffet where we take the things we like but leave the things we don't like. That's no way to treat the Scripture. Better to respect the Scripture enough to accurately interpret it instead. No, Jesus wasn't telling you to pluck your eye out. He wasn't even talking to you.
One more example: Jesus said that if we don't forgive people who have offended us, then God won't forgive those who don't forgive. (See Matthew 6:14-15) Do you really think that's for you??? Do you honestly believe that it's possible that you've trusted Jesus Christ as your Savior, walked with Him, known and loved Him, trusted in His finished work on the cross and now, if it should happen that somebody offends you and you die before you've forgiven them that you won't be forgiven??? Anybody who even slightly uses common sense knows that can't be right!
What's the answer? The answer is that Jesus spoke those words before the cross - before the inauguration of the New Covenant. Notice how everything changed after the cross.
Ephesians 4:32 Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you. Notice here that we forgive because we have already been forgiven, not so we can get it.
What does Colossians 3:13 teach is our motivation to forgive others? "... bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you."
See how everything changes with the end of the Old Covenant and the beginning of the New?
Let's get our covenants separated. That simple step will make a world of difference in understanding our Bibles.
If you want to hear the whole teaching, check out http://www.gracewalkresources.com
in a few days. The whole series will be available there. In the meantime, watch the last installment on http://www.gracewalk.org.
It's part three in this series, called "Two Covenants, Not One."
Steve Mcvey
More
- Re: Two Covenants, Not one beej
14 y
1,982
MoreThis is a reply to # 1,716,686"First of all, the Law was never even given to the Gentiles. It was given to Israel."
Second of all, no covenant was ever given to the Gentiles.
We can be part of Israel.- Re: Two Covenants, Not one vektek
14 y
1,736
This is a reply to # 1,716,718The new covenant was given to spiritual Israel, which would include both Jews and Gentiles.
Romans 9:6
But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; 7 nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants, but: "THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED." 8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.
- comments to this article vektek
14 y
1,832
This is a reply to # 1,716,724Some of these help to clarify:
karen said...
AWESOME!!!!!
10:53 AM
Joel said...
Wow! I've never ever heard that before. I mean nothing like it at all. That's really interesting and it kind of makes sense. Thank you
11:29 AM
Dennis said...
Great message Steve. Thank you very much for sharing God's REAL grace message!
11:36 AM
Recovering Alumni said...
Holy CRAP!!! This changes everything!!
11:40 AM
joeborgx said...
i had this idea but not this clear..Thank God
12:25 PM
Andre and Natalie said...
Awesome post Steve... Once again!!
The Old Covenant was between God and Israel, and basically consisted of God promising the Jews a geographical area called the promised land. No other nation could inherit under this covenant, in fact we see God in numerous occations acting against the other nations on Israel's behalf.
How confusing it is when we try to take onto ourselves a set of regulations never intended for us in the first place! I wrote a 2-part message on this a few months ago as well:
http://www.newcovenantgrace.com/old-testament-end-pt-1/
http://www.newcovenantgrace.com/old-testament-end-pt-2/
In Grace
Andre
3:16 PM
debbie said...
i have heard this before, many times from Wayne
Monbleau, but this clarified so much... a weight is lifted today,,,,
3:31 PM
Lance said...
absolutely !!! get the word out!
two out of print books to read on this subject are janowski's "the evangelical essential" and weavers' "the gospel solution". neither are new covenant preachers.
regarding the sermon on the mount, it makes perfect sense if Jesus meant it all literally. ...i sometimes tell people that, if it could get you into heaven, it *is better* to tear out your eye or cut off your hand. or that it's true: only those who are perfectly merciful would receive mercy without Christ, perfectly peacemaking would get peace with God, etc... of course, no one is perfect and hands and eyes don't make us unfit for heaven, so the SOTM actually pushes us to the cross.
my one critique is about forgiving others and the interpretation of those two verses. ...i believe that we forgive not *because* God forgave us, but because we are in union with God and our spirit desires to forgive every bit as much as God wants to forgive. it is less a response to what God has done for us (forgive us), and more a response to what God has recreated us into (forgiving spirits in union with Him).
8:26 PM
Grace Not Legalism said...
Thnaks for this Steve. As someone who recently made a decisive break with my Messianic Jewish friends over this issue, it is liberating to find out how much greater the new covenant is and how much more freedom we have in Christ!
8:51 AM
santhosh said...
Amen
9:38 PM
Out of the Collective said...
Great post Steve!!
It's amazing how many churches still use the 10 commandments and aim it at Gentiles as a main part of the Gospel supposedly. Eg church signs still often use the 10 commandments.
7:51 AM
faithplusnothing said...
Both covenants were to Israel only. They were made promises not made to the church. We are saved by grace through faith in the finished work of the cross to rule and reign with Him as joint heirs. Israel are going to have a king a a kingdom on the earth. He will be their King and Israel will be ruled by 12 tribes with the Lord as their King. Two distinct bodies of believers saved in different ways and serving two different ways under one God. Peter is correct when he preaches in Acts that their sins MIGHT be blotted out WHEN the time of refreshing comes. That is when the new covenant will be in place. Peter was preaching AFTER the cross. No talk of Jesus died for your sins. He didn't know still. Only in Acts 15 and Gal 2 when Paul communicated the gospel given to Him by the risen Lord did he find out things had changed. The church isn't an off shoot of Judiasm.
8:02 AM
Veronika C AC said...
Steve, you just basically said I can ignore everything Jesus said before He died. I have a problem with that.
1:12 PM
Steve McVey said...
Veronica - you basically didn't understand the post. My view is that we should honor and respect the words of Jesus enough to properly interpret and understand them. Do you personally apply everything Jesus said to yourself? If so, have you cut off your hand? (I assume you've used your hand to sin at some point in your life) Have you gouged out your eye? (I assume you've lusted for something or somebody at some time in your life.) Go through what Jesus said in Matthew 5 alone and you'll see that despite your problem with what I've said, you don't do what Jesus said about these examples I've given as well as other things He said there. Do you see the point? We must understand the context into which Jesus spoke - the people to whom He spoke, the time at which He spoke, etc. Otherwise, because of your misunderstanding you will find yourself in a very conflicting situation because there's no way way you're going to apply every word Jesus said to yourself. Nor are you supposed to. I hope this helps clear up your confusion.
3:25 PM
Vicki said...
Hi - this doesn't fully resonate for me , although i'm sure that there is some life in it for me. for example, the words in jeremiah of one's heart being deceitful above all things has great implication for my life today but not at all in a punitive way as some assume. I simply believe that without the help of God, I cannot fully know myself, my motives,etc. I live a reflective life and don't assume that everything i feel as first blush reveals the depths of my emotions. So, in this example, i actually find that passage to be very hopeful and life giving and relevant for me today. I also think there is the whole issue of imagery, allegory, analogy, literalness, etc that transcends 'two covenants'. I simply think that regardless of old/new testament, there are many other aspects that need to be considered as to whether i should literally 'poke my eye' out. So, i would take your words and hold them along with others things that resonate for me.
2:45 PM
Steve McVey said...
Just curious, Vickie. What aspect could make you decide that you should literally poke your eye out? Just wondering what that scenario would look like ...
2:49 PM
Vicki said...
steve - gosh no - there is no scenario that would make me decide that i should poke my eye out. i don't take that statement literally at all - and would not do so regardless of whether it was in the old OR new testament. that was the point i was trying to make. i don't think it was meant literally for ANY group. conversersely my point was that things IN the old testament have relevance for me and i used your exmaple of 'our hearts are deceitful above all things' as seen thru the veil of Love. so that passage does not make me feel at all 'evil', but rather i hear the invitation to allow God to help me figure out me. so, not sure why you are getting that i should poke my eye out..
3:30 PM
Steve McVey said...
Whew, my mistake. Glad to hear that, Vickie :) My apology for misunderstanding what you were saying.
3:44 PM
Vicki said...
hey steve - i think that the way i wrote it fostered a miscommunication. i really just meant that regardless of whether that showed up (old or new testament) i would not take it literally, b/c i think many factors come into play in terms of how i want to understand something beyond if it is old or new , including the culture of the times, the people who were being spoken to, AND things like analogy, allegory, poetry, imagery etc. it may be that i just didn't grasp the main point of your post.
- Those poor diluted people. beej
14 y
2,104
Lugol’s Iodine Free S&H
J.Crow’s® Lugol’s Iodine Solution. Restore lost reserves.
Original Dr. Hulda Clark
Hulda Clark Cleanses
Bio Cleanse Detox Kit
”It seems so many people (including myself) are walking around w...
This is a reply to # 1,716,746God made only one religion and the whole world is asked to be a part of it.
The Christ was promised to Adam and Eve. They were just as much Christians as Paul was.
The things that Jesus taught were for all people.
God taught the Jews about Him so that they could share it with the world, and they did. Christianity isn't a new religion that started at the cross.
People looked for the Messiah(which is Christ in Hebrew) for four thousand years.
1Peter 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you.
When did that say Christianity began?- Re: Those poor diluted people. vektek
14 y
1,746
Lugol’s Iodine Free S&H
J.Crow’s® Lugol’s Iodine Solution. Restore lost reserves.
Original Dr. Hulda Clark
Hulda Clark Cleanses
Bio Cleanse Detox Kit
”It seems so many people (including myself) are walking around w...
This is a reply to # 1,716,867I don't agree with all those commments those people made to that article. But the ones Steve Mcvey made I thought helped to clarify what he was saying in the article.
I do know there are two covenants, one now being obselete. The bible specifically says this. And Christ said the new would not be like the old. If the new covenant is not like the old, we need to understand what all that means. I know it doesn't mean Christ has changed or that how one was ever saved has changed. But in His plan, he did change things. He made a new covenant. If he never changed anything, then why a new covenant?
I know I have a lot of studying to do to understand it all. Again, I think the bible can be quite complicated. Some of what I put up I'm just trying to figure out myself.
Jeremiah 31:31-32
31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32Not 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:
- Re: Those poor diluted people. vektek
14 y
1,746
- Those poor diluted people. beej
14 y
2,104
- Re: Two Covenants, Not one beej
14 y
2,078
This is a reply to # 1,716,724Isaac was Israel's father, and Abraham's son. When we become part of spiritual Israel, there is no longer Jews or Gentiles. Galatians 3:28
The New Covenant is in Hebrews 8:8-12.
Romans 7:14 For we know that the law is spirtual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Galatians 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
Walking is your physical actions.- Re: Two Covenants, Not one tomato
14 y
1,774
This is a reply to # 1,716,756Papyri Receipts for taxes then were recovered.
There was a Greek Word, Telelestai, written on receipts.
Telelestai can mean paid in full.
I love the blood of Jesus. Something about His blood has always interested me. If I were alive then I wondered if I would have gathered some of His blood to keep.
The covenant with Jesus-
Jesus said He had finished the work God had sent Jesus to do. And Jesus said His work fully completed. Then Jesus bowed His head and died.
A writer said when masters' servants were sent on missions
and later returned to the master...
the servant would say that word Telelestai.
A writer thought it meant that word,Telelestai,...servant did exactly what master requested.
another meaning of this word...the mission is now accomplished.
Jesus was a better inbetween sacrifice for man and God.
Jesus' blood is mans' receipt...paid in full.
- Re: Two Covenants, Not one tomato
14 y
1,774
- comments to this article vektek
14 y
1,832
- Re: Two Covenants, Not one vektek
14 y
1,736
- Re: Two Covenants, Not one beej
14 y
1,982
Share:
Translate This Page: