Search

You searched for 'Old Covenant'

I've found 17 results!

John Owen's Case For Particular Atonement

Simon Wartanian | 11,406 views | 15,628 words | 1:22:53 hours | 21 March 2017 23:01

...ugh I have added my own exegesis of the passages above, I have greatly benefited from Owen's insight into the connection between Christ sacrifice and His subsequent intercession. This is, in my opinion, a very powerful argument for Particular Atonement. Even if we take into consideration the work of the High Priest on behalf of Israel, for example, on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). It will quickly be replied by our opponents that the High Priest interceded for all of Israel, which included unbelievers, and the sacrifice was likewise made for all of Israel. We will not object to that fact, only to the supposition that the membership of the Mosaic and New covenants are the same. The Old Covenant included in it both believers and unbelievers, while the New Covenant includes only believers. It is made only with them and all of its members have the benefits of the covenant applied to them (Jer. 31:31-34; Heb. 8:6-13). Therefore, the analogy or the type, still stands. The only difference is the people who make up the covenant. On the one hand, the Old Covenant contained both believer and unbeliever alike; while the New Covenant subsists of believers only. The High Priest interceded only for the covenant people of God and not for the heathen and godless. Likewise, our High Priest intercedes not for the world, but for those who are His. Furthermore, we should be able to distinguish between the type (Levitical priesthood) and the antitype (Christ's high priesthood) and keep them distinct.

The End of Christ's Death

Now we have began with book II of Owen's monumental work. He begins by returning to the subject in chapter 1 of book I, which concerned the end (i.e. goal) of Christ's death as Scripture declares it (see above).

The primary, or “supreme and ultimate” end of Christ's death is the glory of God. The glory of God stands at the center in Reformed theology. That is what attracted me at the beginning to Reformed theology. The obsession with the glory of God and trying to do all things to His glory. Everything and anything that God does, He does first of all to and for His glory. Owen cites a few passages to this effect (Prov. 16:4; 2Cor. 4:15; Eph. 1:6, 12; Phil. 1:11; 2:11; Rev. 5:13; I would add Isa. 46:8-11). Owen says:

The Lord doth necessarily aim at himself in the first place, as the chiefest good, yea, indeed, that alone which is good; that is, absolutely and simply so, and not by virtue of communication from another: and therefore in all his works, especially in this which we have in hand, the chiefest of all, he first intends the manifestation of his own glory; which also he fully accomplisheth in the close, to every point and degree by him intended.^[7] (book II, chapter 1)

The secondary, or the end that is “intermediate and subservient to that last end” of Christ's death, which is “the bringing of us unto God” (book II, chapter 1). The salvation of the elect is “subservient” to the glory of God. Generally, if you would ask an Arminian, or a non-Calvinist, what God's primary purpose or plan is, they would likely answer “redemption.” On the other hand, Reformed theologians see that God's glory is the primary goal and end of everything which God does, including the salvation of the elect, but that in itself is not the primary goal; the glory of God is the primary goal.

Before enquiring in the Scriptures, Owen lays down the thesis which he is trying to prove:

“Jesus Christ, according to the counsel and ...

Extensive review of Jonathan Menn's Biblical Eschatology

Simon Wartanian | 3,983 views | 12,397 words | 1:05:40 hours | 09 February 2022 21:11

Book Reivew Jonathan Menn Eschatology Amillennialism Dispensationalism Millennium

...shall be overthrown!” (Jonah 3:4). There are no ifs or buts to be seen in Jonah’s prophecy, but God clearly relented from the disaster which He intended to bring on Nineveh. Why? Because Nineveh repented and God will not judge the righteous. While there was no contingency in Jonah’s preaching, prophecy by its nature is nonetheless contingent.

Redemptive historical context

When interpreting prophecy, it is important to consider the context in which it was spoken. In this respect, it is of special importance to consider the redemptive historical context. Old Testament prophecy primarily gave New Covenant prophecies veiled in the shadows and types of the Old Covenant. The New Testament is unmistakably clear that the Old Covenant and its institutions are by nature typological of New Covenant realities and are fulfilled in Christ and His people.

Examples of this include: Jesus describes his body as the “temple” (John 2:18–22); the church as a whole is called the “temple” or the “tabernacle” in 1 Cor 3:9, 16–17; 2 Cor 6:16—7:1; Eph 2:21; 1 Pet 2:5; Rev 3:12; Rev 13:6; Paul uses OT language of burnt offerings to describe money given to assist his ministry (Phil 4:18; see Exod 29:18); in Revelation the leaders of end-time nations are referred to as “kings” (e.g., Rev 16:14; 19:18); and the bringers of catastrophe are compared to horses whose riders are equipped with ancient armor and weapons (e.g., Rev 6:2, 4, 5, 8; 9:7, 9, 17). (p. 10).

It is also to be observed that the change from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant is astronomical. We cannot interpret the Old Testament as if the Lord Jesus Christ—the Messiah of Israel—has not yet come. In light of Christ’s first coming, the Old Testament must be interpreted by the light which is still shining forth from the empty tomb. The Messiah is not a mere addition to Old Testament prophecy but is the heart of it and in Him (and those who are joined to Him) they find their ultimate fulfillment. Therefore, when we consider the temple in Old Testament prophecy, we must never think of a building of brick and mortar, since Christ Himself claimed to be the true temple (John 2:19-22) and the rest of the NT makes also clear that His people are the temple (e.g., Eph. 2:19-22; 2 Cor. 6:16-18). Therefore, to think of a return to a physical building is such an anti-climax that it is unimaginable how Christian interpreters can match it with the progressive nature of revelation which is fulfilled in the New Covenant. At this point it is also important to understand the purpose for which the physical temple (to keep using the same example) was given. The purpose of the temple was to be a place where the true God would be worshiped and meet with His people. Under the New Covenant, this purpose is fulfilled in the believers being the true temple of God. Therefore, the focus should not be on the physical building of the temple, but on the purpose for which it was given. Since the purpose for which it was given is fulfilled, therefore, the temple is likewise fulfilled. This is placing Old Testament prophecy in its covenantal context so that the people of God could understand yet it was not the purpose of Old Testament to give the idea that the physical temple will be rebuilt (think of Jer. 3:16-17 for example). The reality to which the temple pointed is already here, what use is the type if the antitype is already in place?

......

A Review of O. Palmer Robertson's The Israel of God

Simon Wartanian | 7,454 views | 3,313 words | 0:17:02 hours | 19 January 2017 22:25

Book Review O. Palmer Robertson Israel Of God Eschatology Covenant Theology Dispensationalism Kingdom Of God

...y tribe and language and people and nation” (Rev 5:9). The distinction between Jew and Gentile no longer applies under the New Covenant (e.g. Gal 3:28). In fact, Paul explicitly says that Jew and Gentile believers have been made one in Christ in Ephesians 2.

There was a helpful discussion and exegesis of the text from which the book gets its name, Galatians 6:16. Dr. Robertson shows how the “Israel of God” in the entire context of Galatians cannot mean anything but all believing Jews and Gentiles. I found his exegesis and discussion on the text very helpful (pp. 38-46).

Dr. Robertson argues that a return to the old land is a return to the shadows of the Old Covenant which are done away with in Christ. Moreover, Dispensationalists believe that there is distinction between Israel and the Church and in the Millennium the Jews will be the head. This is nothing more than the old distinction between Jew and Gentile, which Christ has abolished, but now it is being brought again. This is a return to the Old Covenant which has been abrogated. It is a return to the shadows. It is impossible.

Another helpful aspect which Robertson touches on is the fact that the majority of Israel is still in rebellion against Christ, they are not part of the Covenant of Grace (New Covenant), therefore, they have no theological claim upon the land, not to mention the typology of the land of Canaan. Only those who have faith in the Christ of God can claim the promises of God.

Its Worship

The book of Hebrews is probably my second favorite epistle after Romans. It is masterful and deep. This chapter is dedicated to an exegesis of Hebrews 7 wherein the superiority of the New Covenant is shown. Although not stated explicitly at the beginning, the purpose of this chapter is to make impossible the idea of a rebuild temple and priesthood for whatever reason by showing the superiority of the work of Christ and how by His work He has abolished the old system. This was a very enjoyable chapter.

Because of this great privilege of continual access to the very presence of God himself, we should look for no other city, temple, sacrifice, or priesthood. The perfections of Jesus provide all we need, both for this life and for that which is to come. As a consequence, our worship cannot conform to the old patterns associated with the previous priesthood and sacrifices. Instead, the new covenant community must worship in a way that indicates that the old rituals are gone and the eternal realities have come. (p. 83)

Its Lifestyle

Chapter four was perhaps the chapter from which I learned the most. In this chapter Dr. Robertson examines the wilderness motif throughout the Scriptures for the people of God. He shows the wilderness in relation to Israel. How from then the Scriptures form a basis that the wilderness is the time for God’s people to be tested and nourished by God. The wilderness imagery or motif dominates Scripture and describe the journey of the people of God. Just like Israel of old had to wander in the wilderness 40 years before entering the land of Canaan, so likewise, the Israel of God must wander the wilderness of this world before entering their everlasting Sabbath—Heaven.

The wilderness motif is not only found in the Old Testament, but it is also found in the life of John the Baptist as well as the Lord Jesus Christ.

In the wilderness the people of God are disciplined by God as sons, as He disciplined His Old Covenant people. In...

Review of Dean Davis' The High King of Heaven on Amillennialism

Simon Wartanian | 12,974 views | 8,095 words | 0:42:03 hours | 13 April 2015 23:31

Review Book Review Dean Davis The High King Of Heaven Amillennialism Eschatology Reformed Eschatology

...

i.“The contrasting mode of covenantal reading is very valuable, since it highlights and magnifies the true greatness of the New Covenant, a greatness that consists in the fact that it is none other than the Eternal Covenant; the one true redemptive plan that God conceived in eternity past, veiled in OT times, and unveiled in these last days through his Son, so that now and forevermore, his people may worship him in spirit and truth (John 1:14, 17, 4:23-24).” Page 236

ii.In the Comparative Reading we look for the inferiority of the Old Covenant as opposed to the New Covenant blessings.

Christological
1. We see Christ and Him crucified. We look for types, shadows and prophecies about the Messiah and His work.
Ecclesiological
1. We see OTKP fulfilled in the Israel of God (Gal 6:16) which is comprised of both Jews and Gentiles. Everyone who is in the New Covenant (Rom 2:25-29; 9:6-7; 11 [one olive tree]; Eph 2:13-19; Phil 3:3; 1 Pet 2:4-11).
2. In this point we are in strong disagreement with Dispensationalists who teach the distinction and the two plans of God for the Church and Israel.

This table is of some help to show the unity of the Church and true spiritual Israel:

Israel	Church
Saints (Num 16:3; Deut 33:3)	Saints (Eph 1:1; Rom 1:7)
Elect (Deut 7:6-7; 14:2)	Elect (Col 3:12; Titus 1:1)
Beloved (Deut 7:7; 4:37)	Beloved (Col 3:12; 1 Thess 1:4)
Called (Isa 41:9; 43:1)	Called (Rom 1:6-7; 1 Cor 1:2)
Church (Ps 89:5; Mic 2:5 (LXX); Acts 7:38; Heb 2:12)	Church (Eph 1:22; Gal 1:13; Acts 20:28)
Flock (Ezek 34; Ps 77:20)	Flock (Luke 12:32; 1 Pet 5:2)
Holy Nation (Exod 19:5-6)	Holy Nation (1 Pet 2:9)
Kingdom of Priests (Exod 19:5-6)	Royal Priesthood (1 Pet 2:9; Rev 1:6)
Peculiar Treasure (Exod 19:5-6)	Peculiar Treasure (1 Pet 2:9)
God’s People (Hos 1:9, 10)	God’s People (1 Pet 2:10)
Holy People (Deut 7:6)	Holy People (1 Pet 1:15-16)
People of Inheritance (Deut 4:20)	People of Inheritance (Eph 1:18)
God’s Tabernacle in Israel (Lev 26:11)	God’s Tabernacle in Church (John 1:14)
God walks among them (Lev 26:12)	God walks among them (2 Cor 6:16-18)
Twelve Patriarchs	Twelve Apostles
God married to them (Isa 54:5; Hos 2:19; Jer 3:14; 6:2; 31:32)	Christ married to them (Eph 5:22-23; 2 Cor 11:2)

Dean Davis leaves us with three principles for the interpretation of OTKP, and they are:

All OTKP’s are fulfilled in the two-fold spiritual reign (Kingdom) of God instituted by Christ under the New Covenant, and must be interpreted accordingly.
To a greater or lesser degree, all OTKP’s are covenantally conditioned, and must be interpreted accordingly.
All OTKP’s are fulfilled in the Church, and must be interpreted accordingly.

Obviously, you may see some of those things as unreasonable, but I assure you they are not, that’s why you need to get your hands on the book.

Dean demonstrates the accuracy of the New Covenant Hermeneutic by letting the NT interpret the OT. He deals with:

Acts 2:33-35 & Psalm 110
Acts 7:44-50 & Isaiah 66:1-2
Acts 13:46-47 & Isaiah 49:1-12
Acts 15:12-21 & Amos 9:11-12
Romans 9:19-26 & Hosea 2:14-23
Romans 10:12-13 & Joel 2:28-32
Rom. 11:25-27 & Isaiah 59:15-21
2 C...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 13: Of Sanctification - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 16,140 views | 16,934 words | 1:29:010 hours | 05 March 2015 18:23

The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Chapter 13 Chapter Thirteen Sanctification Holiness

...h can never take away sins. 12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.

Through the perfect obedience of Christ to the Father, we have been sanctified and set apart for God’s purpose and use on the cross when the High Priest offered Himself as the spotless sacrifice. Then the writer to the Hebrews contrasts Christ’s superiority to that of the priests under the Old Covenant. Then in v. 14, he says that His once-for-all-time offering has perfected all of those who are being sanctified. Notice that in v. 12, the writer used the word ἡγιασμένοι (hegiasmenoi, G37), which is a perfect passive participle verb. The perfect tense describes a completed verbal action in the past. The passive voice means that the action is being done unto the subject and not by the subject. Here we see the verb ἁγιάζω (hagiazo, G37) being used as describing something that happened in the past. But we see a few verses later that the same verb, in a different form, is used again. In v. 14, we have the present passive participle ἁγιαζομένους (hagiazomenous). The present tense is the same as the English, it describes something that is happening at the present time when the author is writing. Those who are perfected are the ones who at the present time are being sanctified. We have been set apart for the purpose of God from all eternity and when we come to faith. But even at the present, God is at work in us to do His good pleasure and conform us more into Christ’s image. Notice also that both aspects of our sanctification, either the initial or the continual, are based on Christ’s atoning sacrifice.

God and Man

Notice that with the definition given by Grudem above (see here), he says that sanctification “is a work of God and man”. In this process of sanctification, which is throughout the Christian life, man and God work together to bring about the result that we would be like Christ. Unlike regeneration, which is monergistic, i.e., there is only one power at work, sanctification is synergistic, i.e., there is a “together” working of man and God. Philippians 2 is an interesting text on this point:

Phil. 2:12-16 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, 13 for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure. 14 Do all things without grumbling or disputing, 15 that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you shine as lights in the world, 16 holding fast to the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain.

At the beginning of the chapter, Paul points to the Lord Jesus as the great example of humility whom the believers should model. He sets Christ as the example of the perfect faithful servant of God, like Whom all believers should seek to be. Now Paul is telling the believers to work out their salvation (not work for their salvation), namely—to bring the full perfection and implication of their salvation by following Christ’s example as the servant of God. They are to work out their salvation and bring the fruits thereof ...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 3: Of God's Decree - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 32,210 views | 38,059 words | 3:19:02 hours | 04 March 2015 20:58

The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Chapter 3 God's Decree Predetermination Predestination Sovereignty Compatibilism Reprobation Unconditional Election Calvinism

...yp5"[8]

All that happens, God has purposed. He looks at world history and He says concerning everything that happens, good and evil: “My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose.” Isaiah doesn’t leave us without proof of this but gives us a proof—Cyrus the Great. God directs all history according to His counsel and purpose, an example of that is the rise of Cyrus the Great, who is called “a bird of prey...a man of [God’s] counsel.” He has risen on the scene of history to accomplish God’s purpose. One of his purposes was to bring the Old Covenant people of God back to their land and build the Temple of God. He was used for a good purpose. But in contrast, there was someone else who was raised by God for God’s purposes, but that was a dishonorable purpose (Rom. 9:17; see the discussion about Pharaoh and Reprobation in paragraph 3).

Note the monergy in v. 11 (mono = one, ergon = work; one working) of God. I am not using this term in the same way as it relates to salvation. God is the One Who has purposed history and He is the One Who will bring it to pass, according to His fore-purpose and fore-counsel. He will move history to its appointed end and work all things according to His purpose (Heb. 1:3; Eph. 1:11). Nothing is left to chance or fate. God controls and directs history and man’s actions, obviously, are part of what He controls, if He truly controls and ordains all things. God knows the future not because He looks to the “corridors of time,” but because He creates the shape of the future–He foreordains all that happens and knows the future infallibly because He knows what He has foreordained and purposed.

This should be enough about general sovereignty. I believe that I have provided a decent case for God’s absolute sovereignty over history. I have not gone deep and to other texts, but that is because I have already provided a case for God’s absolute sovereignty, though not exegetically. In the next section, we will look at God’s sovereignty over particular matters as evil and human responsibility, among other things.

Particular Sovereignty

Here, I’m going to provide verses for God’s sovereignty in and over specific cases. Let’s start with simple things. Simple, does not mean easy-to-swallow-things.

Life And Death

This should not be an issue for any Christian, but believe me, I’ve seen people who believe that God only “permits” death and does not cause it. What does the Scripture say?

1 Sam. 2:6 The LORD kills and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up.

It is Yahweh, the LORD, the God of the Bible, Who gives life and takes life. Both words are verbs. It is something that God does and not merely “permits.” As the Giver of life He has every right to take it at any point He so wishes, in any way He wishes. It is He Who gives us life and creates us in the womb (Ps. 139:13-16). He is the Ultimate and Foremost Cause in our conception. It is He Who closes wombs so that they do not conceive and opens wombs so that they bear children (e.g., Gen. 20:17-18; 30:2; Ruth 4:13). After all the calamity that God (Job 42:11) brought upon Job and the death of his children, what did Job say?

Job 1:21 And he said, “Naked I came from my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return. The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.”

Who took? Yahweh. The Lord doesn’t owe us anything, even if we do all that He says we should do, we will only do our duty (Luke 17:7-10). We owe...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 24: Of the Civil Magistrate - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 11,568 views | 5,667 words | 0:29:28 hours | 06 March 2015 19:38

The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Chapter 24 Civil Magistrates Civil Government Romans 13

...trong mean more to him than an unbelieving magistrate. His views of justice and peace will be and should be influenced by the biblical worldview. But principally, he is to enforce and maintain the wholesome laws of each kingdom and commonwealth. This is obviously different than what other Reformed writers had in mind. For many of them, the government had the duty to maintain the Christian religion and not only the Christian religion in general but Protestant Christianity in particular. But the Baptists did not follow with that as they did not see the New Covenant and the regulations under the New Covenant to be just like those in the times of the Old Covenant with the Mosaic laws. The Mosaic judicial laws were no longer applicable. The only application had to do with their “general equity” (see chapter 19:4). Furthermore, they were being persecuted by those very people who wanted a particular branch of Christianity to be defended by the state, although they were as much Reformed and Christian as they were. Hence the publication of this Confession of Faith to show that we have more things in common than different.

Lastly, there will be times of war, but this has to be upon just and necessary occasions and it is specifically said to be under the New Testament. In other words, not every instance of war in the Old Testament is justifiable now under the New Covenant. But at the same time, this does not mean that no war is justifiable under the New Covenant.

Christians are not to reject involvement in civil matters but are to accept them. It is not sinful, contra the Anabaptists, to work in the government. Christians in the government are to seek justice and peace. They are not to turn the civil government into a theocracy, but they are to influence it and maintain justice and peace. Their rule is to be according to the laws of the land, yet one cannot disconnect their own convictions of the Law of God. One cannot be neutral at work and Christian at home. When Christians work in the government, they should try to bring their Christian convictions with them to work. They cannot believe one thing on Sunday and promote contrary things on the other days of the week. There is a fine difference between being influenced by the biblical worldview and trying to reimplement the civil law of Israel again. I’m sure many of us know politicians in our countries who are devoutly Christian and try to bring their Christian influence in the land we live.

Examples of believers involved in pagan governments are Daniel and his three friends, Nehemiah who later became governor of Judea, but before this, he was a cupbearer to Cyrus the king of Persia. It was his request to the king which initiated the return of the exiles to Judea and the rebuilding of Jerusalem. These wise people influenced their pagan governments with the principles of God’s Word and God blessed their endeavors. How much more should Christians now to be an influence in their governments and the world. We should concern ourselves not only with heavenly things but earthly things also. We are in the world, but not of it. But as we live in the world we are to be light and slight unto it. We are not to be so heavenly-minded that we forget that we are living on a cursed earth. We should preach the gospel to everyone and take up any office we are called unto to make a change in the world. Christian magistrates are to be known for their Christian hospitality. How often do we read in the Old Te...