What and Where are the Terms of the New Covenant?

quote:

---

This covenant promised eternal life to anyone who fulfilled it perfectly.
When "life" is promised/spoken of in the O.T. it means in this life and the next one - eternally.

---

Where does the OT covenant promise eternal life for anyone who fulfilled it perfectly?
Show me the scripture that uses the word life to refer to eternal life.

quote:

---

NOW God can relate to mankind by the gospel/New Covenant - way of faith to relate, which replaces the Old Covenant way of the works of the Law which NOBODY could keep except for Jesus.

---

Give me some examples of what you call works of the law.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

The only Christian Bible "new covenant" reference attributed directly to Jesus is the Luke 22:20 reference from the "Last Supper." All the rest can be attributed to Paul. Some will argue that Luke worked for Paul, and that the Luke reference may be attributed to Paul as well.

---

That's why I wanted to know what Jesus said about the new covenant. Paul had a vision, but then so did John Smith and he was told everything was wrong.All new covenant roads lead to Paul.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

That's what I was afraid of.Per my OP, I am not looking for Paul's presentation of the new covenant. I'm quite aware of what Paul says about the NC. That was the focus of the covenant study in the NT.I am looking for the terms of the new covenant that Jesus supposedly instituted at the last supper.What did Jesus say were the terms of the new covenant?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

What I see is Jesus summarizing the laws, just as Hillel before him did. See Message 9I'm not advocating that we are still under the Jewish Laws. Many of the laws that dealt with health, civil and legal areas are part of our own society rules. Some of the religious rules have also worked their way into various religions. So they really haven't been done away with.From what I read I don't see that Jesus did away with them. It looks like Paul did that. God gave rules for a nation of people that sets them apart from other nations, just like our laws today are different between nations. I think someone had mentioned that the new covenant was an individual covenant and not something between God and a nation. Unfortunately, I don't see Jesus presenting that either.What I don't see is, as WT proposes, God stating that the people were required to obey all the laws perfectly.Like we had discussed in Message 15 and Message 16, the poor were suffering the most from the excessive additions and the cost the temple and sacrificing. Many clergy have done that same today.I find it interesting that according to NT Jesus died as a final sacrifice which then ended the sacrificial system. When the Temple was destroyed the system stopped anyway.

quote:

---

regarding divesting oneself of material possessions

---

You mean like the preachers that promise if you tithe enough you will receive back more money or possesions or something to that effect?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Again, the point of this thread is not to argue Paul's Gospel.I do have some questions on items you have mentioned.

quote:

---

This covenant promised eternal life to anyone who fulfilled it perfectly. Nobody ever did except Jesus Christ...

​

BUT Jesus fulfilled the O.T. law every "jot and tittle"

---

Where does the OT state that eternal life is promised to anyone who fulfills the covenant perfectly? By fulfill I am assuming you mean to obey all the rules. Which covenant. There are three. The one with Noah, one with Abraham, and the one with Moses and the people of Israel.If you are talking about the Mosaic laws and by fulfill you mean to obey all the laws, did Jesus obey every single law or commandment listed in the OT? In other words, was Jesus a good person who just didn't do anything to break any of the laws that pertained to him, or was Jesus tempted to break all of these laws listed and chose not to? List of the 613 Mitzvot

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

You didn't answer my question.Where does the OT state that eternal life is promised to anyone who fulfills the covenant perfectly?BTW, how did Jesus fulfill the laws pertaining to women?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

It is a fair question since you stated that

quote:

---

BUT Jesus fulfilled the O.T. law every "jot and tittle"

---

Therefore your statement is false, since he couldn't fulfill the laws for women.
Plus, unless he was a high priest he couldn't fulfill those laws either.You were unable to show where God said in the OT that the laws have to be followed perfectly or that one could obtain eternal life if they were followed perfectly. According to you the Hebrews had to wait until Paul gave them that revelation. (How many years?) That would mean that God purposely set the Hebrews up for failure.Or maybe they just missed the fine print in the contract.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

cardiac rehab

---

I hope all is well on the home front!Are you staying above water level down south?
We had one small town under water and a few roads around us were flooded.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Good to hear you are OK.Yes WT has bailed out on me. This is usually the response I get in Bible study groups.I try to get Christians to back up their catch-phrases from the OT or at least Jesus.Example: God is constant and never changes, but then you bring in Paul. His writings don't seem to be consistant with the teachings of Jesus and the OT or can't be found in either one. Besides the fact that Paul's writings are letters and we only have one side of the conversation. We don't seem to have anything written on what he actually taught when he visited these churches.The covenant study made such a big deal out of the covenant being a contract. They went through all the parts of the contract: terms, agreement, sealing, etc.The OT is clear in the contracts. In the NT we have no specific terms defined by Jesus before the supposed sealing (last supper). What people present as terms are the same as the Jewish teachings of the time. Not anything new.Then you have Paul's gospel which when presented by WT is even more mind boggling. But again the statements cannot be reconciled with the OT.In another thread someone said that God never breaks his promises. But if the new covenant, as Paul suggests, ends the Mosaic covenant; then God broke his promise.See how the constant and never changing part is really falling apart?Now the teachings of Jesus were consistant with the Jewish teachings of the time and he said he was not there to end the law. I think he was trying to trim the fencing a bit and get people to remember the individuals needs. Priests got just as obsessed with money and power as many clergy do today. As you mentioned they forgot about the not gathering wealth on earth. Unfortunately we don't have all of what Jesus taught either.The disciples of Jesus seemed to remain true to the Jewish laws.So from what I can tell by the posts so far, Jesus presented nothing truly new. He may have actually been renewing the "old" covenant.
The destruction of the Temple did away with the sacrificial system.
Paul seems to be the one who set up the terms of the new covenant.
As you've seen we have many variations on what those terms are.If the Mosaic covenant ended with Jesus, then God set the Hebrews up for failure; since God supposedly knew about the Messiah from the beginning.

quote:

---

I couldn't find any references in the Hebrew bible to a "Kingdom of Heaven," "Eternal Life," or "Paradise." Seems those concepts come about after 400 - 200 BCE or so.

---

I agree, I haven't been able to find them in the five books of Moses. Isn't that about the time they came back after the exile?Have an excellent week!

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Looks like you didn't have any better luck.
He's like dogma with a bone!

quote:

---

I will put my laws in their hearts, and in their minds I shall write them

---

So isn't it the Mosaic laws that God will put in our hearts?
Many of them have become a part of our society anyway.No one wants to answer that question.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Read this on Romans and tell me what you think.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

Hey WmScott,
Glad you took the time to read the site.2 Peter isn't considered to be written by Peter, so it loses some authority.From what I have studied in the OT, they didn't twist the words. They actually brought Paul more in line with the teachings of Jesus, which were in line with the Jewish teachings of the time.

quote:

---

Christ fulfilled the Mosaic law and ended it and replace it with a new law, one written on hearts made up of righteous principles and standards rather than a detailed list of do's and don't.

---

Your principles and standards are still based on something. You aren't pulling them out of thin air. There are two different things going on here. 1. There is the faith that gets you eternal salvation, a place in the world to come, etc. Great, that's the afterlife 2. Now for the current life: For a group of people to live as a nation, village, group, etc. you need guidelines for accepted civilized behavior. Even Paul had to come up with rules for behavior in church services.If you look at the Mosaic laws you will find a lot of them have become a part of our legal and medical systems. The sacrifical system went away after the temple was destroyed anyway.IMPO the "fence" they kept adding around the Torah is what they became a slave to. The oral law kept adding so no one would accidently break one of the written rules. Those rules got ridiculous. (Of course the more the people had to sacrifice the more the Levites received.)So are Christians only basing their guidelines on the behavioral teachings that Jesus brought forward? In many cases it says he continued to teach, but we don't know what he said in those cases.So what are the righteous principles that make up the Law of Christ?

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

I rushed the earlier answer. I was trying to get done before the power went out. Hopefully this one makes more sense.Circumcision is part of the Abrahamic Covenant which is everlasting and still applicable to his descendants. Not meant for Gentiles.I agree that the Mosaic laws are not the means to eternal life. They never were. They are however the laws of the Jewish Nation and any alien who wished to live among them was subject to those rules. God covered that on several occasions. Example: When I move to a new state, I am subject to their laws. I visit another place of worship, I am subject to their rules of conduct and worship or at least the minimum to respect their ways. Join the military and again I am subject to their rules.So while the Gentiles are not in general bound by the Mosaic laws, if Gentiles wish to worship within Jewish synagogues or live within the Jewish community, then they would fall under those rules. Again this has nothing to do with eternal life, but temporal life.Hence the point on Yashanet stating that the minimum requirements set down for the Gentiles were so they could associate with the Jews without offending as they learn the rules of the community.If the Gentile Christians were not living within the Jewish community, then they would need their own rules of conduct and worship. Again this has nothing to do with eternal life.As societies grow, sometimes the original purpose of a standard are lost. Some Jews felt one had to be circumcised to be part of the Jewish community. There are churches today that say you must be baptized (not sprinkled) to be saved, etc. The Jerusalem church held that the Gentiles did not need to be circumcised.The laws of Moses included religious, civil, legal, and health laws. Even during the time of Jesus, the Jews were allowed to govern themselves. Religion today doesn't legally govern the temporal life of the people.There will always be people within a faith that keep the rules of right behavior for the wrong reasons. As they grow in their spirituality that should change.Separate what is necessary for eternal life and what is necessary for temporal harmony within a group or nation.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

quote:

---

No, the Abrahamic Covenant was ended in about 36 AD with the conversion of Cornelius the first gentile into the Christian faith. The Abaramic Covenant was for the Jews to become followers of the messiah and become his spirit anointed followers and rule as kings and priests in heaven with Jesus.

---

So God didn't keep his word?
Where does God tell Abraham the covenant was for the Hebrews to become followers of the messiah and become his spirit anointed followers?

quote:

---

(Exodus 19:6)" And YOU yourselves will become to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words that you are to say to the sons of Israel."

---

This was stated at the time of the Mosaic Covenant. No mention of Abraham or the messiah.

quote:

---

When gentiles became anointed with holy spirit, they became part of Abraham's seed just like the Jews and received the promises made to the Jews.

---

According to Paul who is not the messiah.
Besides, if the Abrahamic and Mosaic Covenants are ended as you say, then what promises are left? The promises were part of the covenants.

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.

You are right! In the way that you and WT present Paul I do not listen to him. He makes some good points on behavior, but Paul is an evangelist and pretty much does what is necessary to make a sale.Your whole presentation makes God look untrustworthy.
I don't buy that God dumped the Jews.As you and WT so eloquently put it, Paul declared the beginning of the New Covenant, Paul declared an end to the the previous covenants, and Paul declared that the Gentiles can inherit from Abraham.So does Christianity follow Paul or Christ? (rhetorical question)Supposedly I should be a Christian because I have faith in Jesus (the annointed one, Christ), not Paul. I should have faith in God, not Paul. The Holy Spirit is supposed to teach us, not Paul.The fruit of the spirit doesn't include believing Paul. I don't have to believe what Paul says or teaches to have right behavior or faith in God.So you both have shown that the new covenant wasn't presented by Jesus, but was brought forth by Paul.Fascinating!

---

A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger.