It was my intention to write something on all the Biblical covenants, but I find that time is against me. I shall (DV) be convalescing from an operation in a few weeks time and I may be able to do more then. Anyway, here is my take on the new covenant which may help people understand better the Covenant of Grace.
Read Hebrews 8:6-13; 10:1-10; Luke 22:20
This is the last in this short series on the covenants. Perhaps it will be helpful if I recapitulate the scheme that I proposed at the beginning.
Firstly, there are two covenants, made with a ‘public person’ or ‘covenant head.’ These are the so-called Covenant of Works, made by God with Adam, and the Covenant of Grace, made with The Lord Jesus. Christ and the Holy Spirit. Then, there are four ‘covenants of promise’ (cf. Eph 2:12) which are made with individuals: that made with Adam and Eve, expressed in Genesis 3:15 and typified in v21; and those made with Noah, Abraham and David. There is no continuing administration to these covenants; no one is ‘under’ a covenant of promise. They are fundamentally promises of a ‘Seed’ or ‘Messiah’ and are fulfilled in Christ (2Corinthians 1:20), each one giving more detail concerning Christ.
Finally there are two covenants made with a people through a mediator. These are the Sinaitic (‘Old’ or ‘first’) Covenant made with Israel according to the flesh through Moses, and the New Covenant made with Israel according to the Spirit (Rom 2:28-29; Gal 3:7, 16, 29; Phil 3:3) mediated by Christ (Heb 9:15). The Sinaitic Covenant promised long life in the Promised Land in return for obedience to the law of God (Deut 6:33). The New Covenant promises eternal life in heaven to those who believe (John 11:25f). It unites men and women to God through Christ by faith. More detailed discussion on the other covenants (apart from the Noahic) can be found at Covenants – Martin Marprelate. It may be easier to understand this article if one has read the preceding ones first.
The New Covenant fulfils all the other covenants. It is the implementation of the covenant of grace, its outworking in time. Christ has redeemed the people that God gave to Him in the covenant of grace (John 6:39; 17:6). He has acted as mediator between God and men (1Tim 2:5-6) and now He calls them to Himself (John 6:37). The New Covenant is also the realization of the covenants of promise. The promises to Adam, Noah, Abraham and David pointed to Christ and are fulfilled in Him (cf. Luke 2:72). It is also the replacement for the Sinaitic or Mosaic Covenant (Hebrews 8:13; 10:9). That ‘old’ covenant fades away with the coming of the new (2Cor 3:7-8).
The important point to note about the New Covenant is that it is in Christ’s blood (Luke 22:20; Hebrews 13:20). Unlike the old covenant, the New cannot fail (Romans 8:3-4; Hebrews 10:1-4). Christ has offered the one perfect acceptable sacrifice for sins, has gone through the heavens, opening a new and living way for us to come to God through Him (Mark 15:38; Hebrews 10:20).
A question that often comes up in discussion concerning the New Covenant is whether, strictly speaking, it is ‘new’ or ‘renewed.’ ‘”Behold, the days are coming,” says the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah- not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt”’ (Jer 31:31, my italics). It is clear to me that we are talking about two different covenants here; the New is ‘not according to’ the Old. However, this has not prevented many commentators from claiming that the two covenants are basically the same. The Hebrew word translated new’ here is chadash, and because this word is the same one used in Lamentations 3:22-3, ‘His compassions fail not, they are new every morning,’ the suggestion is that chadash should be translated as ‘renewed;' that God’s mercies are basically the same ones, renewed day by day, and the new covenant is just the old one somewhat improved. Those arguing for a ‘renewed’ covenant tend to be either extreme Messianic Jewish groups (1) or Presbyterians for whom the unity of the covenants is paramount. A modern example of the Presbyterian argument is A Simple Overview of Covenant Theology by C. Matthew MacMahon (2). Part of this book takes the form of a sort of Socratic dialogue between a Seminary professor and a hapless student:-
Professor: The idea around the word itself as an adjective means taking something already existing and “renewing it” – either repairing it to a previous state or in taking something that was already and making it better. As both a noun and adjective this word refers to things new in this sense, and to things restored. Now some like to think that this word is exclusively meant as “brand new.” But this does injustice to its use in the Old Testament. They will quote verses like, Exodus 1:8. Now there arose up a new king over Egypt,” or Isaiah 43:19. “I will do a new thing.” These surely seem like “new” is “brand new don’t they?
Student: Yes, but I am afraid you are going to tell me otherwise…
Professor: Well, yes, actually, there is more to it than just quoting a verse or two. For example, without going into great detail, is the station of “kingship” new or not? Is having a new king something brand new or a renewal of the class of kingship? How does the Hebrew mind think about this? How does the rest of Scripture demonstrate this?
Student: I would have to concede that a new king does not make the class of “kingness” new, although a new king is a good element of fulfilment to kingship.
This is the most dreadful stuff! A new king is by definition a replacement of the old king. It is not ‘The Curse of the Mummy’s Tomb’- the old king revived in some way! The ‘class of kingness’ doesn’t come into it. In Exodus 1:8, the old king was good; the new one was bad. The old king knew Joseph; the new one didn’t. The old king was presumably dead; the new one was alive. They were two different people. The new one was not the renewal of the other; he was the replacement.
Let’s look at some other examples of chadash and see whether ‘new’ or ‘renewed’ best suits the context:-
Deut 24:5. ‘When a man has taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war…….’ Is this wife new, or is she renewed in some way? Is it perhaps an old wife who has had a facelift or liposuction? The meaning is perfectly clear. Probably the man in question has not been married before, but if he has, then his previous wife has either died or been divorced. In every case, it is a brand new wife, possibly replacing the old one.
1Sam 6:7. ‘Now therefore, make a new cart…..’ Not, ‘repair an old cart,’ but ‘make a new one.’ This is not ‘fulfilling the class of cartness,’ but making a brand new cart.
Isaiah 42:10. ‘Sing to the LORD a new song…..’ Not the same old song with updated lyrics or a different tune, but an entirely new song.
Isaiah 65:17. ‘For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth…….’ Surely this means a renewed heaven and earth, doesn’t it? Not at all! ‘…….And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind.’ It is a completely new construction. ‘For the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and all the works in it shall be burned up……etc.’ (2Peter 3:10ff). The new heavens and earth are not a repair or renewal of the old, but a replacement.
There are several other places in the O.T. where chadash is used. Readers can check them out for themselves by making an internet search or by using a Young’s Analytical Concordance. So consistent are they in revealing the meaning of chadash as ‘New’ that we need to look again at Lamentations 3:23. Perhaps we need to say that the Lord’s compassions are not the same ones renewed every morning, but that there is an inexhaustible supply of new mercies available to meet our every need. At all events, the usual, and perhaps the invariable meaning of chadash is indeed ‘new,’ replacing anything that may have gone before.
So let us look again at Jer 31:31ff which I quoted above. We learn that the new covenant is both new and ‘not according to’ the old. We are not therefore to impose Abraham or Moses onto Christ, for the former things were types and shadows and have passed away. This is graphically illustrated for us by the episode concerning the Transformation of our Lord (Mark 9:2ff). Elijah and Moses, representing the law and the prophets are seen conversing with the Lord Jesus. Then a cloud comes across and a voice is heard saying, “This is My beloved Son. Hear Him!” (v7). And Moses and Elijah are seen no more, but Jesus only.
[Continued]
Read Hebrews 8:6-13; 10:1-10; Luke 22:20
This is the last in this short series on the covenants. Perhaps it will be helpful if I recapitulate the scheme that I proposed at the beginning.
Firstly, there are two covenants, made with a ‘public person’ or ‘covenant head.’ These are the so-called Covenant of Works, made by God with Adam, and the Covenant of Grace, made with The Lord Jesus. Christ and the Holy Spirit. Then, there are four ‘covenants of promise’ (cf. Eph 2:12) which are made with individuals: that made with Adam and Eve, expressed in Genesis 3:15 and typified in v21; and those made with Noah, Abraham and David. There is no continuing administration to these covenants; no one is ‘under’ a covenant of promise. They are fundamentally promises of a ‘Seed’ or ‘Messiah’ and are fulfilled in Christ (2Corinthians 1:20), each one giving more detail concerning Christ.
Finally there are two covenants made with a people through a mediator. These are the Sinaitic (‘Old’ or ‘first’) Covenant made with Israel according to the flesh through Moses, and the New Covenant made with Israel according to the Spirit (Rom 2:28-29; Gal 3:7, 16, 29; Phil 3:3) mediated by Christ (Heb 9:15). The Sinaitic Covenant promised long life in the Promised Land in return for obedience to the law of God (Deut 6:33). The New Covenant promises eternal life in heaven to those who believe (John 11:25f). It unites men and women to God through Christ by faith. More detailed discussion on the other covenants (apart from the Noahic) can be found at Covenants – Martin Marprelate. It may be easier to understand this article if one has read the preceding ones first.
The New Covenant fulfils all the other covenants. It is the implementation of the covenant of grace, its outworking in time. Christ has redeemed the people that God gave to Him in the covenant of grace (John 6:39; 17:6). He has acted as mediator between God and men (1Tim 2:5-6) and now He calls them to Himself (John 6:37). The New Covenant is also the realization of the covenants of promise. The promises to Adam, Noah, Abraham and David pointed to Christ and are fulfilled in Him (cf. Luke 2:72). It is also the replacement for the Sinaitic or Mosaic Covenant (Hebrews 8:13; 10:9). That ‘old’ covenant fades away with the coming of the new (2Cor 3:7-8).
The important point to note about the New Covenant is that it is in Christ’s blood (Luke 22:20; Hebrews 13:20). Unlike the old covenant, the New cannot fail (Romans 8:3-4; Hebrews 10:1-4). Christ has offered the one perfect acceptable sacrifice for sins, has gone through the heavens, opening a new and living way for us to come to God through Him (Mark 15:38; Hebrews 10:20).
A question that often comes up in discussion concerning the New Covenant is whether, strictly speaking, it is ‘new’ or ‘renewed.’ ‘”Behold, the days are coming,” says the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah- not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt”’ (Jer 31:31, my italics). It is clear to me that we are talking about two different covenants here; the New is ‘not according to’ the Old. However, this has not prevented many commentators from claiming that the two covenants are basically the same. The Hebrew word translated new’ here is chadash, and because this word is the same one used in Lamentations 3:22-3, ‘His compassions fail not, they are new every morning,’ the suggestion is that chadash should be translated as ‘renewed;' that God’s mercies are basically the same ones, renewed day by day, and the new covenant is just the old one somewhat improved. Those arguing for a ‘renewed’ covenant tend to be either extreme Messianic Jewish groups (1) or Presbyterians for whom the unity of the covenants is paramount. A modern example of the Presbyterian argument is A Simple Overview of Covenant Theology by C. Matthew MacMahon (2). Part of this book takes the form of a sort of Socratic dialogue between a Seminary professor and a hapless student:-
Professor: The idea around the word itself as an adjective means taking something already existing and “renewing it” – either repairing it to a previous state or in taking something that was already and making it better. As both a noun and adjective this word refers to things new in this sense, and to things restored. Now some like to think that this word is exclusively meant as “brand new.” But this does injustice to its use in the Old Testament. They will quote verses like, Exodus 1:8. Now there arose up a new king over Egypt,” or Isaiah 43:19. “I will do a new thing.” These surely seem like “new” is “brand new don’t they?
Student: Yes, but I am afraid you are going to tell me otherwise…
Professor: Well, yes, actually, there is more to it than just quoting a verse or two. For example, without going into great detail, is the station of “kingship” new or not? Is having a new king something brand new or a renewal of the class of kingship? How does the Hebrew mind think about this? How does the rest of Scripture demonstrate this?
Student: I would have to concede that a new king does not make the class of “kingness” new, although a new king is a good element of fulfilment to kingship.
This is the most dreadful stuff! A new king is by definition a replacement of the old king. It is not ‘The Curse of the Mummy’s Tomb’- the old king revived in some way! The ‘class of kingness’ doesn’t come into it. In Exodus 1:8, the old king was good; the new one was bad. The old king knew Joseph; the new one didn’t. The old king was presumably dead; the new one was alive. They were two different people. The new one was not the renewal of the other; he was the replacement.
Let’s look at some other examples of chadash and see whether ‘new’ or ‘renewed’ best suits the context:-
Deut 24:5. ‘When a man has taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war…….’ Is this wife new, or is she renewed in some way? Is it perhaps an old wife who has had a facelift or liposuction? The meaning is perfectly clear. Probably the man in question has not been married before, but if he has, then his previous wife has either died or been divorced. In every case, it is a brand new wife, possibly replacing the old one.
1Sam 6:7. ‘Now therefore, make a new cart…..’ Not, ‘repair an old cart,’ but ‘make a new one.’ This is not ‘fulfilling the class of cartness,’ but making a brand new cart.
Isaiah 42:10. ‘Sing to the LORD a new song…..’ Not the same old song with updated lyrics or a different tune, but an entirely new song.
Isaiah 65:17. ‘For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth…….’ Surely this means a renewed heaven and earth, doesn’t it? Not at all! ‘…….And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind.’ It is a completely new construction. ‘For the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and all the works in it shall be burned up……etc.’ (2Peter 3:10ff). The new heavens and earth are not a repair or renewal of the old, but a replacement.
There are several other places in the O.T. where chadash is used. Readers can check them out for themselves by making an internet search or by using a Young’s Analytical Concordance. So consistent are they in revealing the meaning of chadash as ‘New’ that we need to look again at Lamentations 3:23. Perhaps we need to say that the Lord’s compassions are not the same ones renewed every morning, but that there is an inexhaustible supply of new mercies available to meet our every need. At all events, the usual, and perhaps the invariable meaning of chadash is indeed ‘new,’ replacing anything that may have gone before.
So let us look again at Jer 31:31ff which I quoted above. We learn that the new covenant is both new and ‘not according to’ the old. We are not therefore to impose Abraham or Moses onto Christ, for the former things were types and shadows and have passed away. This is graphically illustrated for us by the episode concerning the Transformation of our Lord (Mark 9:2ff). Elijah and Moses, representing the law and the prophets are seen conversing with the Lord Jesus. Then a cloud comes across and a voice is heard saying, “This is My beloved Son. Hear Him!” (v7). And Moses and Elijah are seen no more, but Jesus only.
[Continued]