did the new Covenant Start in Gospels or Acts?

[Iconoclast]

Iconoclast,
Interesting. I don't think I said hell. Before the death of Christ hades held both the righteous and the unrighteous. I need more to adopt such a view as you are proposing. How it is then that the scripture says;
being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit
in which [fn] he went and proclaimed [fn] to the spirits in prison,

Does not that teach that this happened after His physical death although alive in the Spirit?

1Peter 3:18,19
For Christ also suffered [fn] once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit
in which [fn] he went and proclaimed [fn] to the spirits in prison,

.
FAL
you are correct...it was the realm of the unseen dead

The view I put forth is based upon this:

3And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

18because also Christ once for sin did suffer -- righteous for unrighteous -- that he might lead us to God, having been put to death indeed, in the flesh, and having been made alive in the spirit,

19in which also to the spirits in prison having gone he did preach,

20who sometime disbelieved, when once the long-suffering of God did wait, in days of Noah -- an ark being preparing -- in which few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water;


The idea being that the same Spirit that raised Jesus to life, is the same Spirit who preached to the spirits in prison...who once disbelieved in the days of Noah. The preaching was to those who lived in Noahs day...but disbelieved.

There is no second chance......
27And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

What would Jesus preach to them?? In luke 16 the rich man knew correct theology in hell...he knew why he was where he was.

 

[freeatlast]

.
FAL
you are correct...it was the realm of the unseen dead

The view I put forth is based upon this:


18because also Christ once for sin did suffer -- righteous for unrighteous -- that he might lead us to God, having been put to death indeed, in the flesh, and having been made alive in the spirit,

19in which also to the spirits in prison having gone he did preach,

20who sometime disbelieved, when once the long-suffering of God did wait, in days of Noah -- an ark being preparing -- in which few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water;


The idea being that the same Spirit that raised Jesus to life, is the same Spirit who preached to the spirits in prison...who once disbelieved in the days of Noah. The preaching was to those who lived in Noahs day...but disbelieved.

There is no second chance......
27And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

What would Jesus preach to them?? In luke 16 the rich man knew correct theology in hell...he knew why he was where he was.

Thank you for the reply. It is interesting that Peter says of Paul that HE writes things difficult to understand. :laugh:

 

[Gina B]

Are you saying that you believe it began at the beginning of the written record we call the New Testament?

The original question asked was if the New Covenant started with the synoptic Gospels or in Acts.

I'm saying that the New Covenant started with those Gospels. As to the exact moment? I guess some would debate that. Technically, it was a process that started with the conception of Christ and as another poster noted, there was a transitional period, but in my opinion, it was more transitional for the sake of human comfort than anything to do with the reality of the New Covenant because those that saw Jesus and believed obtained salvation apart from the law. The moment Jesus overcame death, there was no longer a need or Paradise, salvation was made permanent.

I guess it would depend on how you look at it, but if one believes that Jesus was the Messiah, then one would have to admit that his birth was the fulfillment of the prophecy of Messiah and that as was told, he would be the final sacrifice, so that means the moment he was conceived, the New Covenant started.

If one wants to get into the moment it became complete and official, and I'm not sure why one would care to bother since it is what it is and already done, (perhaps just to entertain a moment of curiosity?) then it would have to be the moment death was overcome, because only the Messiah could do that and the moment that was done, full pardon for believers became official.

Then again, someone mentioned the tearing of the veil. Symbolic...so then one could further entertain the notion of what overcoming death is. Was it just spiritual that he needed to overcome forever, or did the Messiah HAVE to conquer literal death in order for salvation to become permanent? Did he just go speak to those in hell and paradise and tell them what happened and that when he physically rose from the dead, they'd be going to heaven? I don't know.

It's interesting to think about though, but more interesting and great just to know that we don't have to worry about it. We're part of that covenant and if that's the only thing that was ever imparted to me as far as knowledge goes...well, that's more than any of us deserve, right?

 

[Amy.G]

I guess it would depend on how you look at it, but if one believes that Jesus was the Messiah, then one would have to admit that his birth was the fulfillment of the prophecy of Messiah and that as was told, he would be the final sacrifice, so that means the moment he was conceived, the New Covenant started.

Hebrews 9:15 Therefore, He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called might receive the promise of the eternal inheritance, because a death has taken place for redemption from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 Where a will exists, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will is valid only when people die, since it is never in force while the one who made it is living.


The New Covenant could begin only after the death of Jesus, not His birth.

 

[convicted1]

Hebrews 9:15 Therefore, He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called might receive the promise of the eternal inheritance, because a death has taken place for redemption from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 Where a will exists, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will is valid only when people die, since it is never in force while the one who made it is living.


The New Covenant could begin only after the death of Jesus, not His birth.

BINGO!!! :thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

Give the little poodle, err, I mean, little lady a cee-gar!! Just a cheap King Edwards, not those expensive Cubans.

 

[glfredrick]

"This is the new covenant in My blood." Required death in order to shed blood that would be remembered. That Jesus propheised His own death should not throw us off the path and make an error as to when the new covenant actually started.

 

[Gina B]

Hebrews 9:15 Therefore, He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called might receive the promise of the eternal inheritance, because a death has taken place for redemption from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. 16 Where a will exists, the death of the one who made it must be established. 17 For a will is valid only when people die, since it is never in force while the one who made it is living.


The New Covenant could begin only after the death of Jesus, not His birth.

When you're right, you're right. :thumbs:

My self-imposed task for the day: read ALL of Hebrews.

*cue stunt actor to play part of my argument crashing off a cliff and burning while looking semi-embarrassed*

 

[Van]

Reply to OP

were the 4 gospels and events recorded there still under/in Old Covenant, or were they recording for us New Covenant history/events/doctrines?

I too believe the New Covenant in His blood was inaugurated when Jesus gave up His Spirit and physically died. I base this on two verses, one in John 3 where Jesus says no one has ascended into heaven, indicating the Old Covenant was in effect during the major historical part of the gospels, i.e. pre-death of Jesus, yet on the cross Jesus said, today you will be with Me in paradise, indicating the New Covenant would be in effect on the day Jesus died, i.e. Friday evening, after He died and before the start of the next day at sundown.

 

[Amy.G]

*cue stunt actor to play part of my argument crashing off a cliff and burning while looking semi-embarrassed*

:laugh:


It's ok Gina. There won't be a test. :tongue3:

 

[DaChaser1]

"This is the new covenant in My blood." Required death in order to shed blood that would be remembered. That Jesus propheised His own death should not throw us off the path and make an error as to when the new covenant actually started.

Wouldn't the resurrected of jesus actually complete the salvation process from time wise, as he had to be raised in order to validate that the father had accepted His sacrifice as indeed payment in full?

 

[michael-acts17:11]

Wouldn't the resurrected of jesus actually complete the salvation process from time wise, as he had to be raised in order to validate that the father had accepted His sacrifice as indeed payment in full?

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17)

The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. (Heb 9:8-12)

It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: (Heb 9:23-24)

 

[DaChaser1]

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17)

The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. (Heb 9:8-12)

It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: (Heb 9:23-24)

So salvation was fully completed at His ascension to heaven, and TAHT would be when new Covenant actually started?

 

[Van]

I think we must be careful to understand Jesus had not physically ascended into heaven when seen outside the tomb, but two days before Jesus had been in Paradise. So He and the criminal entered heaven spiritually, but not physically. Just like us, who have been born anew are spiritually in Heaven because we are in Christ and Christ is in heaven at the right hand of the Father.

 

[Mark_13]

I think we must be careful to understand Jesus had not physically ascended into heaven when seen outside the tomb, but two days before Jesus had been in Paradise. So He and the criminal entered heaven spiritually, but not physically. Just like us, who have been born anew are spiritually in Heaven because we are in Christ and Christ is in heaven at the right hand of the Father.

I could be wrong, but I think there's a possibility that the thief on the cross is still in his grave (along with everyone having died in Christ), with no sentience of anything. At the resurrection, he will have no sense that 2000 years have past and so it will be as if he expired and then instantaneously his resurrection occurred. So effectively it would be as if "Today" (i.e. the same day he was crucified) he was with Christ in Paradise. Otoh, I think that saints from the future, (i.e. after the resurrection) are watching us now, but from the future (as time travel is undoubtedly a possibility for them). But in another sense they're still in their graves right now, and not sentient of anything until the actual resurrection occurs.

No one has to go into paroxysms over this - I know I haven't proved it. Feel free to try and disprove it if you want.

 

[percho]

I too believe the New Covenant in His blood was inaugurated when Jesus gave up His Spirit and physically died. I base this on two verses, one in John 3 where Jesus says no one has ascended into heaven, indicating the Old Covenant was in effect during the major historical part of the gospels, i.e. pre-death of Jesus, yet on the cross Jesus said, today you will be with Me in paradise, indicating the New Covenant would be in effect on the day Jesus died, i.e. Friday evening, after He died and before the start of the next day at sundown.

By what priestly means was the blood of Jesus the Christ presented before God the Father in the most Holy?

So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee. As he saith also in another [place], Thou [art] a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him; Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

Was it not the resurrection that made him high priest?

 

[michael-acts17:11]

So salvation was fully completed at His ascension to heaven, and TAHT would be when new Covenant actually started?

The Covenant could not be completed until after Christ offered His blood in the true holy of holies as the everlasting High Priest & not until the Spirit was given as the seal of the promise.

 

[Van]

Reply to Mark13,

I could be wrong, but I think there's a possibility that the thief on the cross is still in his grave (along with everyone having died in Christ), with no sentience of anything. At the resurrection, he will have no sense that 2000 years have past and so it will be as if he expired and then instantaneously his resurrection occurred. So effectively it would be as if "Today" (i.e. the same day he was crucified) he was with Christ in Paradise. Otoh, I think that saints from the future, (i.e. after the resurrection) are watching us now, but from the future (as time travel is undoubtedly a possibility for them). But in another sense they're still in their graves right now, and not sentient of anything until the actual resurrection occurs.

No one has to go into paroxysms over this - I know I haven't proved it. Feel free to try and disprove it if you want.

Trust in what the Bible does not say is unsound. Any invention of man that is not explicitly addressed in scripture, such as time travel, can be propounded, but we are to stick with what the Bible actually says.

In Revelation, recall the saints who had died and were asking how much longer they must wait? Clearly some awareness of the passage of time is part of our spiritual habitation of heaven.

 

[Van]

Was it finished when Jesus died on the cross, or only really finished when Jesus walked out of the tomb? It was finished on the cross. But then why is the resurrection so important. Paul said the truth of gospel hangs on the truth of the resurrection. So the resurrection proves salvation is of the Lord, but His death provides it. Because Jesus promised numerous times that He would die and then arise in three days, and He did, we can be sure that His promise of eternal life is also true. If He had not walked out of the tomb, His promises were untrustworthy, and therefore we would still be dead in our trespasses. But instead because God raised Jesus from the dead, we know God accepted Christ's sacrifice as payment in full for the sin of the world, and He really did become the propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world.