Tackling Tradition 87: “The New Covenant”

The term “The New Covenant” is a title traditionally ascribed to a particular administration of the Covenant of Grace.  As a matter of biblical nomenclature, what does the Bible say?  Answer There is no text in the Bible that mandates we call the Johannine administration of the Covenant of Grace “The New Covenant,” & at no point does the Bible call it “The New Covenant” as a proper name/title.  Objection   The Bible itself calls it the new covenant (Luke 22:20; 1 Corinthians 11:25; Hebrews 8:8-13; Hebrews 9:15; Hebrews 12:24). 12:24.  Answer This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.  ( Luke 22:20 , ESV) Yeshua is using as descriptor & refers to its usage in the OT.  “I will make a new covenant…”   The text uses the article *the* in Luke to emphasize that the promise was being fulfilled in their sight.   He isn’t declaring the title of the covenant.   He is pointing out that the time ...
Post a Comment

Tackling Tradition 11 - Rainbow Bright

This is the time of year in which the chattering class reminds everyone that the rainbow is a symbol of God’s promise not to destroy the world by way of a Flood.  Any references to it as a symbol of unity & diversity are overlooked, censored, and/or just plain forbidden.  

The rainbow is far more than that.  It represents God’s battle bow turned upward because He would rather destroy Himself than fail His promises.  It also symbolizes God’s aegis, His own instrument of protection that prophesied over us all, reminding us of His aegis & that we ourselves, as lights in the world, are His aegis. 

God’s covenant is both cut in love & underwritten by love.  Love liberates & protects (1 Corinthians 13). 

The rainbow also symbolizes unity & diversity within the terms of the covenant itself.  How so? The terms of the covenant are with **all living beings** not just with a subset of them.

The text repeats those terms five times - yet somehow the only takeaway people seem to get is that it symbolizes God’s promise not to destroy us all by watery means. 

Genesis 9:8–17 (ESV): Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him, 9 “Behold, I establish my covenant with you and your offspring after you, 10 and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the livestock, and every beast of the earth with you, as many as came out of the ark; it is for every beast of the earth. 11 I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.” 12 And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations: 13 I have set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14 When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, 15 I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh. And the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh. 16 When the bow is in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.” 17 God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant that I have established between me and all flesh that is on the earth.”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Favorite Fallacies & Homosexuality

Thesis - The tradition bound view on homosexuality commits a number of logical, epistemic, & exegetical fallacies.  1-  Is - Ought Fallacy  - Human anatomy is said to provide    a blueprint for sexual ethics.  We examined this in my previous article.  A moral “ought” is derived from a physical “is.”  The disputant makes an illicit leap from what is to what ought to be. A classic example is the way some homosexuals defend their sexual ethics by appealing to their biology/genetics.  2 -  Vicious Circularity   - Human anatomy & physiology are raised to the status due a non-arbitrary epistemic warrant.    A non-arbitrary epistemic warrant must be necessary, reasoned, & principled.  In truth, the body is unnecessary to deduce sexual ethics. By way of contrast, God’s nature is definitionally necessary, insofar as God is a necessary being, &, since God is infinite, eternal, & unchangeable in being, w...
Read more

City Of God Study Module 2

            ✨ 👑 GALLIFREY 👑✨                       EDISON/ADONAI                           CAMBRIDGE BASTILLE & PLUME     SAGACITY & THORN                            Zodiac ICONOCLASTS LAW & ORDER         Bishop     Vanity Fair          Forge      Toymaker    Archibaptrix     Chameleon         Enigma     Governess         Corsair       Jodpurs         Sextant       Dauphin       Carnevale       Libertine           Arsenal                  Mosaic  ...
Read more

Romans 1:18 - 32 & Leviticus 18

Paul is following the basic outline of a suzerain covenant in general     & the outline of Lev. 18 in particular.   Shema & Decalogue (Rom. 1:18 - 20)   God’s Image testifies to His attributes & Law.    God created people. His temple bears His Image & runs according to his Law & Gospel.    This corresponds to Lev. 18 : 1 & 2. A - Rom.    1:18 - 19.  God’s wrath falls on those who suppress His image.   B - Rom 1:20  - For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made so that people are without excuse.  What is the teleological intent of the created order?    To serve as an epistemic warrant on par with God Himself? No!  It’s purpose is to serve as a pointer to God who is Himself the only sufficient epistemic warrant for all faith & practice.  ...
Read more