The Covenant Context of Salvation

I think that all nations knew somehow about the Only and True God, my friend.
What I say is that God did not give all nations the same specific ritual laws, or used the same terms and symbols, or social and community norms, as part of his covenants, promises or plans.
Ancient Chinese didn't measure time in weeks, and we have absolutely no historical evidence that God had sent any messenger or prophet to the Chinese to encourage them to keep the Sabbath... and no evidence within the Bible that God condemned foreign nations for violating the Sabbath.

In addition, God could give to the same nation, different rituals or signs of His Covenant at different historical times.
For example, Jesus explicitly commanded his Jewish disciples to baptize others, but Moses did not command that. Did he?
God told Abraham that circumcision would be an "everlasting covenant" (Genesis17:13). So important, that people rejecting circumcision would be "cutt of" from the nation (17:14). However, centuries later, Paul declares it optional, irrelevant if you have circumcised your heart.

We can discuss the commandment of keeping the Sabbath in a separate thread if you are interested, Studyman.

Circumcision of the heart was always the requirement from God, in my view. To rule over/cut off the Flesh (Emotion/desire/lust etc.) was a command from the beginning. Cain committed the Sin of hating his brother without a cause. God instructed Cain that he would be accepted, like Abel, if he turned away from his sin (hate for his brother), and rule over the hate (Did well).

Abraham was Spiritually circumcised long before God gave him the Token between him and God. How would men know Abraham was circumcised, or Caleb, or Zacharias? Did they go around flashing their nakedness to show their circumcision? I don't think so. Everyone knew it was a Sin to look on the nakedness of their father. No, it is a private matter between God and man. The Israelites rejected the meaning of Circumcision as Paul exposed in Romans 3 and created their own religion that was called "The Circumcision". Paul exposed them, claiming that the True Church of God is the true Circumcision, as he declared, "We are the Circumcision".

This world's religious system "USES" parts of God's Word to deceive people, just as the serpent quoted "some" of God Word to deceive Eve. The overwhelming tradition of this world's religious sects and businesses is to "USE" Circumcision as a tool of justification to reject God's Judgments, His definition of Holy, Just, Clean and Good. Paul never did this. He "Promoted" Circumcision of the heart noting that the Physical act of Circumcision is profitable "If" a man "Yield's himself to God". But if a man partakes of the physical act, without obedience to God from the heart, his circumcision is made "Uncircumcision". This is what the Law and Prophets teach, for those interested in Seeking God's Truth as defined in the Holy Bible.

Since I have "Yielded myself" to God and His Judgments, Statutes and Commandments with all my heart, I don't need to justify rejecting them. Instead, like Paul instructed, I study the topic to find out why God instituted this Token between Him and man. In other words, I seek "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" in the Holy Bible inspired by the God who instituted Circumcision, and this so "That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" which is what God Commanded of me".

Baptism is a similar topic. Moses most certainly promoted "Baptism" as God had intended it to be used.

Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Ex. 29: 4 And Aaron and his sons thou (Moses) shalt bring unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shalt wash them with water.

Luke 3: 16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: 17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.

Indeed, these are good discussions to have among men seeking God's Truth.
 
I acknowledge, thanks to the posts of @Johann, @JoshebB and yourself, @GodsGrace, that sometimes the Bible handles the term "covenant" as a solemn unilateral promise or oath. This is something important I learned from you all.

It should be evident, however, that at other times the Bible uses the term "covenant" in the usual way it is understood in most languages and dictionaries, even by Christian theologians*.
Not only is that incorrect, it's irrelevant.

For one, we Christians do not measure the Bible by what others do or do not do. You do that, but we Christians do not. Your religion teaches you divine revelation is found in a myriad of teachers and that any contradictions are best understood as relevant or applicable to the time in which they were written/spoken. Furthermore, this op is specific. This op is not about covenants in general. This op is not about non-salvific covenants (such as the Hagar covenant mentioned in Galatians 4). This op is not about covenants with people other than God.

The salvific covenant in Christ is not a two-way covenant in its initiation, its identification of chosen participants, its selection of those participants, their being called or the first command of that covenant, and that is true regardless of what anyone else says.
 
What do you think of the Mosaic Covenant?
Correctly understood, the covenant God spoke of with Moses and those Hebrews was predicated solely open the covenant God had made with Abraham and Jesus and all the promises God poke of therein. God repeatedly states He is doing (or saying) what He is doing because of the promises He made to Abraham (and the patriarchs). In the New Testament we find the NT writers speaking of Jeremiah's "new covenant" but that covenant is simply an extension of what Paul explains was a set of covenant promises spoken to Abraham and Jesus.

Galatians 3:16-18
Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ. What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise. For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise.

The promises were spoken to Abraham and Jesus. Jesus, not Israel, is the promised seed of Abraham. Abraham had many seeds, but Jesus is the one; the one seed that was promised Abe. None of the other seeds are the seed of promise. Moses (along with all the other prophets) and the Law, testify to Christ.

That's what scripture teaches about the so called "Mosaic Covenant".

Were the Israelites not asked to cooperate?
What do you mean by "Israelites"?

Get out your eBible right now and do a quick word search for that word. You will find the word is used only eight times in the entire Bible and its first mention does not occur until Exodus 35. Furthermore, if you do a further search of commonly used terms like "Israel," and "Jews," then you will find 1) the geo-political nation-state of Israel is not mentioned of in the "Mosaic Covenant" until long after the Hebrews reach the promise land, clear it out, and resettle it, and 2) Jews do not exist until 2 Kings!

People use these terms as if they are interchangeable, but scripture does not do that.

According to the New Testament, God's covenant was made with those who live by faith. Abraham was a Hebrew, a Babylonian, not an Israelite, and not a Jew. The word "Israel" is first used in reference to Abraham's grandson, Jacob. The word means "God prevails" or "God perseveres." Jacob's name was changed from "grifter," or "heel grabber" to "God perseveres." The covenant descendants of Abraham, Isaac (the son of promise), and Jacob were called the "sons of Israel," or the "sons of God perseveres." That is what they were called when the left Egypt. They were not called Jews. There were no Jews when the Hebrews were freed from Egypt.

The covenant participants are, therefore, those in whom God perseveres.

I am not digressing. There is a point to all of the above and I encourage you to get out your Bible and verify every word I just posted. The answer to your question is that the Israelites were asked to cooperate only after God had initiated His covenant, after God chose who would participate, after God called the participants, and after He called them as covenant participants and with an expectation of obedience.

Only after all of that is accomplished does the covenant relationship become bi-directional and the responses of the human participants are predicated entirely on the work of God in that covenant relationship. The covenant participant cannot do anything salvifically relevant outside of the constituent elements listed above.
It was a BILATERAL Covenant and had CONDITIONS.
It was not bilateral until long after the covenant was established. And, btw, all conditions are conditional. The salvific covenant in Christ just happens to have all its initial conditions accomplished by God.

Genesis 15:1-18 (excerpted for the sake of space)
After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision, saying, "Do not fear, Abram, I am a shield to you; Your reward shall be very great." Abram said, "O Lord GOD, what will You give me, since I am childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?" And Abram said, "Since You have given no offspring to me, one born in my house is my heir." Then behold, the word of the LORD came to him, saying, "This man will not be your heir; but one who will come forth from your own body, he shall be your heir." And He took him outside and said, "Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be." Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness. And He said to him, "I am the LORD who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to possess it." He said, "O Lord GOD, how may I know that I will possess it?" So He said to him, "Bring Me a three year old heifer, and a three year old female goat, and a three year old ram, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon." Then he brought all these to Him and cut them in two, and laid each half opposite the other; but he did not cut the birds. The birds of prey came down upon the carcasses, and Abram drove them away. Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, terror and great darkness fell upon him. God said to Abram, "Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years...... It came about when the sun had set, that it was very dark, and behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a flaming torch which passed between these pieces. On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants I have given this land....."

Abraham, in his own fleshly thinking, set up what was in those days called a "suzerain ritual," or the workings of a suzerain covenant. For those lurkers who do not already know, a "suzerain" is a king or ruler that possesses sovereignty over another lesser king or kingdom. The conquered ruler, the lesser ruler, pledge fealty to the greater monarch. The ritual entail dividing sacrificial animals in two and placing the halves across from one another, thereby creating a pathway or aisle down which the lesser king would walk. At the end of that pathway the lesser king would kneel and pledge strict obedience and loyalty as a vassal of the sovereign ruler...... and if he ever violated that pledge then he would be cut in two like the animals through which he just walked.

The problem was God never showed up for Abraham to perform the ritual. He spent the rest of the day chasing the scavengers away until he was exhausted and fell asleep. That is when something remarkable happened. In Abraham's vision he saw symbols for God (the smoldering oven and flaming torch) performing the pledge of fealty. God pledged fealty to God on the penalty of His own death should He ever betray the Sovereign LORD. In other words, God took on both sides of the covenant. On that day God asked nothing of Abraham, but it was on that day the covenant was made (it had been initiated many decades earlier, but it was on that day the scripture state the making of the covenant.

It was not bidirectional between God and Abraham. It was bidirectional with God and God. Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ. Christ died because we could not meet the standards of fealty, of obedience and loyalty. God kept His pledge. He kept the pledge He revealed to Abraham that night in Genesis 15.



It is not until long after this that God asks Abe if Abe wants to participate, and He asks Abe to do something to testify to that effect (circumcision). It is exactly the same way with the sons of Israel. They had already been freed of slavery and led to the promise land before they were asked to choose life or death (and although they said they were choosing life, the subsequent testimony of scripture is that most of them lied).


Sadly, there are certain portions within Christianity that do not teach this :(.
 
I don't believe the Scriptures support this philosophy. God has "a Way", and HE offers His Way to men. It's not a negotiation, this is true. The man cannot say, "Well God, I want the Reward you offer, and I'll "profess to know you", but I'm not going to change this part of my life, or that tradition or practice just because you instruct against it." Both parties have to agree to keep their end of the bargain. As it is written:

1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. 2 And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.

In this contract/agreement, God gives the terms and makes a promise. "IF" Abram agrees to the terms, God if Faithful to execute His Promises.

"IF" Abram breaks the terms of the agreement, God is not bound to provide the Promises.
Post 239 contradicts itself and proves what I have posted correct.

You've inserted an "if" where none is stated. The facts of the text are that God initiated the covenant without ever asking Abraham whether or not Abe wanted to have the covenant initiated. God then chose Abe and God never once asked Abe if he wanted to be chosen. God then called and commended Abe, and God commanded Abe as any already-existing participant of the covenant without ever asking Abe if Abe wanted any of it. It was only after all of that had happened that Abe was given a choice.

Abraham was not asked to agree.
"IF" Abram breaks the terms of the agreement, God is not bound to provide the Promises.
See Post #243 above. The terms of the salvific covenant in Christ were met by God, not Abram/Abraham.
 
The salvific covenant in Christ is not a two-way covenant in its initiation, its identification of chosen participants, its selection of those participants, their being called or the first command of that covenant, and that is true regardless of what anyone else says.
I agree 100% with all of this.
So let me state it again: God is the one who initiates it, sets the terms, identifies/select the participants and gives the commands. There is no negotiation with men about this.
 
Not only is that incorrect, it's irrelevant.

For one, we Christians do not measure the Bible by what others do or do not do. You do that, but we Christians do not. Your religion teaches you divine revelation is found in a myriad of teachers and that any contradictions are best understood as relevant or applicable to the time in which they were written/spoken.
It must be evident for you, my friend, that you represent only one of the many variants in which Christians understand this and other topics. This is more than evident if you go across this Forum.
So, I respectfully invite you to exercise care in not putting yourself in the position of spokesman for Christians by saying "we Christians".

The analysis of any apparent contradiction in Scriptures by appealing to the philological, cultural and historical context is not exclusive of any religion. Many Christians apply this principle as well... including you. Isn't that true?


Furthermore, this op is specific. This op is not about covenants in general. This op is not about non-salvific covenants (such as the Hagar covenant mentioned in Galatians 4). This op is not about covenants with people other than God.

I know. Please enumerate the salvific covenants that you would like to cover in this thread, so that we concentrate on them.
 
Last edited:
Post 239 contradicts itself and proves what I have posted correct.

You've inserted an "if" where none is stated.

On the contrary. If you tell your son, "Go mow the lawn and take out the trash, and I will take you fishing". This is exactly the same context as what God told Abraham. It's foolish to believe that if your son rejected your instruction and went to his friend's house to play video games instead of obeying your instruction, you are still obligated to take him fishing. His action would imply he doesn't want to go fishing with you. The agreement is made null and void, based on what your son chose to do. There is no difference if you said, "If you mow the lawn and take out the trash, I will take you fishing".

The "if" is implied.

In like manner, Jesus said,

John 14: 15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

It would be no different if Jesus had said "Love me and keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever;



The facts of the text are that God initiated the covenant without ever asking Abraham whether or not Abe wanted to have the covenant initiated.

First of all, it is absurd to believe that the only communication between God and Noah or Abram, is what is written in Scriptures. Here is what the text actually says;

Gen. 6: 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. 9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Gen. 12:1 "Now the LORD "had said" (Past tense) unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

You have nothing to prove that Abram hadn't already known God, or that God and Noah didn't speak with each other as they walked. What does it say?

Gen. 6: 17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. 18 But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee. 19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. 20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. 21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

22 Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.

4 So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

How do you know that Abrams whole family wasn't called, and only Abram and Lot answered? Did God destroy Sodom for unrighteousness, but never defined for them what Righteousness is? Did not Jesus say "Many" are called, but few are chosen"?

As it is written: "Today, if you hear His Voice, harden not your hearts"

There is nothing in any scriptures throughout the entire Bible that says, suggests, or implies that Abram didn't know God and trust HIM, before God told him to leave.


God then chose Abe and God never once asked Abe if he wanted to be chosen.

I understand that this philosophy you have adopted and are promoting and defending is a popular one, promoted by "Many" "who come in Christ's Name". But if Abram didn't "want to be chosen", he would not have "departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him".

The Philosophy that God chose to offer His covenant to Noah and Abram, but withheld the offer to the rest of the world and Sodom. Then destroyed the rest of the world, and Sodom because "GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually". But saved Noah and Abram based on nothing they did or believed, rather, by some unseen "Holy Lottery", is a widespread teaching, but the Scriptures don't support it, in my view.

God then called and commended Abe, and God commanded Abe as any already-existing participant of the covenant without ever asking Abe if Abe wanted any of it. It was only after all of that had happened that Abe was given a choice.

You are promoting an entire religious philosophy founded on the belief that the only Words God spoke to Abram, is what is recorded in Scriptures. Abram was 50 or 60 years old when Noah died. Is it even possible that Abram didn't know the God of Noah at 75 years old?

Abraham was not asked to agree.

You have nothing from Scriptures to support this philosophy. What we do know, was that sometime before Gen. 12:1, God had spoken to Abram and told him to leave on a Journey with God to a place he would later show him. And Abram trusted God, shown by Abram departing, as the Lord had instructed him, and Lot went with them.

You are adding to God's Word based on the assumption that the only Words spoken between Abram and God are recorded in Genesis.
 
It must be evident for you, my friend, that you represent only one of the many variants in which Christians understand this and other topics. This is more than evident if you go across this Forum.
So, I respectfully invite you to exercise care in not putting yourself in the position of spokesman for Christians by saying "we Christians".

The analysis of any apparent contradiction in Scriptures by appealing to the philological, cultural and historical context is not exclusive of any religion. Many Christians apply this principle as well... including you. Isn't that true?




I know. Please enumerate the salvific covenants that you would like to cover in this thread, so that we concentrate on them.
after a quick review of the BAHI faith , NO WAY my friend . you need to cease that mindset and fast .
I read about progressive revelation of GOD . they are dead wrong , GOD never spoke to budda , to krishna , to muhammed or that other .
The only three on that list that were of GOD and one was not jus a man either
was MOSES , HE heard from GOD , ABRAHAM HE TOO heard from GOD .
and well JESUS HIMSELF was the WORD OF GOD and GOD IS HIS WORD .
As for the others they are false prophets divining lies in the name of what they call god . JESUS will deny THEM ALL on the day
of judgment . I suggest we start beleiving what GOD said and not what men try and say .
 
Not only is that incorrect, it's irrelevant.

For one, we Christians do not measure the Bible by what others do or do not do. You do that, but we Christians do not. Your religion teaches you divine revelation is found in a myriad of teachers and that any contradictions are best understood as relevant or applicable to the time in which they were written/spoken. Furthermore, this op is specific. This op is not about covenants in general. This op is not about non-salvific covenants (such as the Hagar covenant mentioned in Galatians 4). This op is not about covenants with people other than God.

The salvific covenant in Christ is not a two-way covenant in its initiation, its identification of chosen participants, its selection of those participants, their being called or the first command of that covenant, and that is true regardless of what anyone else says.
bro , i just looked up the BAHI faith . You aint kidding its total bad news .
Progressive revelations of GOD . YEAH right . That man needs to seriously repent of that entire deadly mess .
 
bro , i just looked up the BAHI faith . You aint kidding its total bad news .
Progressive revelations of GOD . YEAH right . That man needs to seriously repent of that entire deadly mess .
Hi !
Let's keep the conversation around the salvific covenants, my friend, which is the topic of the thread.
If you are interested in making comments about the Baha'i Faith, there is a thread opened by the Administrator under the section "World Religions".
 
Hi !
Let's keep the conversation around the salvific covenants, my friend, which is the topic of the thread.
If you are interested in making comments about the Baha'i Faith, there is a thread opened by the Administrator under the section "World Religions".
oh i just wanted people to know and understand WHY it is you all and others attack the divinity of CHRIST .
They had to do this within christendom in order to PUMP some progressive revelation
and put jesus as just another prophet so called amongst them false ones too . YOU SEE i know WHY they did this .
The thing is WHY do you and others seem to love this so . We supposed to LOVE TRUTH and not a lie .
Yet , hey tis not just you , heck about seventy plus percent of christendom now believes GOD is just fine with all religons .
JESUS , the dire need to BELEIVE HE IS CHRIST , BEEN DENIED . now who would do that .
WHO would support those who DENY JESUS is the CHRIST and make believe we all serving the same GOD .
A hint .
WHO IS A LIAR , HE who denies that JESUS IS THE CHRIST . HE BE ANTI CHRIST .
if a man believes not the TESTIMONY that GOD gave of the SON , well HE calls GOD a liar ,
SO yeah . THERE IS THAT . why do you all love a lie that wont save one soul but in reality shall lead the false religoins
NOT OUT OF DARKNESS but left trapped in it and worse to even help lead CHRISTENDOM into the same lie .
Man this wont bode well for any and all who were co helpers to that . SO , OUTTA LOVE for your soul , DARN sure not your doctrine ,
I must say time to repent and fast . I will be praying you do too .
 
Correctly understood, the covenant God spoke of with Moses and those Hebrews was predicated solely open the covenant God had made with Abraham and Jesus and all the promises God poke of therein.
I don't understand what you mean J....
We're discussing the Mosaic Covenant here.
What does Abraham and Jesus have to do with the Mosaic Covenant?

God repeatedly states He is doing (or saying) what He is doing because of the promises He made to Abraham (and the patriarchs). In the New Testament we find the NT writers speaking of Jeremiah's "new covenant" but that covenant is simply an extension of what Paul explains was a set of covenant promises spoken to Abraham and Jesus.
I'm sorry...I really don't understand ....
Could we discuss the Mosaic Covenant here?

Now, I do want to say that every Covenant will build upon a prior one or make a prior one better.
Except for the sign....no covenant abolishes the one before it.

I think you might be stating this, but your language is rather confusing.
Galatians 3:16-18
Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ. What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise. For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise.
Oh. OK.
Agreed.

The promises were spoken to Abraham and Jesus. Jesus, not Israel, is the promised seed of Abraham. Abraham had many seeds, but Jesus is the one; the one seed that was promised Abe. None of the other seeds are the seed of promise. Moses (along with all the other prophets) and the Law, testify to Christ.
I agree that the promise made to Abraham was fulfilled in Jesus in the New Covenant when ALL NATIONS would be included in the NC.


That's what scripture teaches about the so called "Mosaic Covenant".
I believe scripture has to agree, of course, but the study of covenants goes beyond scripture.
As you must know...many books are written on the Covenants and scripture ALONE would be a very
difficult study. (I think I've said this before).
What do you mean by "Israelites"?

Get out your eBible right now and do a quick word search for that word. You will find the word is used only eight times in the entire Bible and its first mention does not occur until Exodus 35. Furthermore, if you do a further search of commonly used terms like "Israel," and "Jews," then you will find 1) the geo-political nation-state of Israel is not mentioned of in the "Mosaic Covenant" until long after the Hebrews reach the promise land, clear it out, and resettle it, and 2) Jews do not exist until 2 Kings!
No need to whip out my bible.
ISRAELITES are the group with which God made the Mosaic Covenant with.
The Israelites is the group that was freed from Egypt by Moses.
The Mosaic Covenant was made with the Israelites

As to Exodus 35...
The Mosaic Covenant begins with Exodus 3:1-10
and the actual Covenant is made in
Exodus 19, 23, 34
People use these terms as if they are interchangeable, but scripture does not do that.
I meant the ISRAELITES...
I don't use terms interchangeably unless they are interchangeable.
According to the New Testament, God's covenant was made with those who live by faith. Abraham was a Hebrew, a Babylonian, not an Israelite, and not a Jew. The word "Israel" is first used in reference to Abraham's grandson, Jacob. The word means "God prevails" or "God perseveres." Jacob's name was changed from "grifter," or "heel grabber" to "God perseveres." The covenant descendants of Abraham, Isaac (the son of promise), and Jacob were called the "sons of Israel," or the "sons of God perseveres." That is what they were called when the left Egypt. They were not called Jews. There were no Jews when the Hebrews were freed from Egypt.
J...I wasn't speaking about Abraham. Of course Abraham was a Hebrew.
I was speaking about Moses.

The covenant participants are, therefore, those in whom God perseveres.

I am not digressing. There is a point to all of the above and I encourage you to get out your Bible and verify every word I just posted. The answer to your question is that the Israelites were asked to cooperate only after God had initiated His covenant, after God chose who would participate, after God called the participants, and after He called them as covenant participants and with an expectation of obedience.
Of course God initiates the Covenants.
But the Mosaic Covenant is a bilateral Covenant and required the cooperation of the Israelites...you call it obedience.
OK. same thing.
Only after all of that is accomplished does the covenant relationship become bi-directional and the responses of the human participants are predicated entirely on the work of God in that covenant relationship. The covenant participant cannot do anything salvifically relevant outside of the constituent elements listed above.
A bilateral Covenant is NOT predicated only on the work of God.

Bilateral means that both parties must agree....
If one party does not keep his part of the covenant,,,then it becomes useless and the curses set in.

It was a SOVEREIGN to VASSAL Covenant.

A vassal would be a person, as in the feudal system, that was free but was paid to keep the land of the owner.
It was not bilateral until long after the covenant was established. And, btw, all conditions are conditional. The salvific covenant in Christ just happens to have all its initial conditions accomplished by God.
The Mosaic Covenant was bilateral.
I'm not debating this...you could simply look it up for yourself.

Genesis 15:1-18 (excerpted for the sake of space)
After these things the word of the LORD came to Abram in a vision, saying, "Do not fear, Abram, I am a shield to you; Your reward shall be very great." Abram said, "O Lord GOD, what will You give me, since I am childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?" And Abram said, "Since You have given no offspring to me, one born in my house is my heir." Then behold, the word of the LORD came to him, saying, "This man will not be your heir; but one who will come forth from your own body, he shall be your heir." And He took him outside and said, "Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be." Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness. And He said to him, "I am the LORD who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans, to give you this land to possess it." He said, "O Lord GOD, how may I know that I will possess it?" So He said to him, "Bring Me a three year old heifer, and a three year old female goat, and a three year old ram, and a turtledove, and a young pigeon." Then he brought all these to Him and cut them in two, and laid each half opposite the other; but he did not cut the birds. The birds of prey came down upon the carcasses, and Abram drove them away. Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, terror and great darkness fell upon him. God said to Abram, "Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years...... It came about when the sun had set, that it was very dark, and behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a flaming torch which passed between these pieces. On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants I have given this land....."

Abraham, in his own fleshly thinking, set up what was in those days called a "suzerain ritual," or the workings of a suzerain covenant. For those lurkers who do not already know, a "suzerain" is a king or ruler that possesses sovereignty over another lesser king or kingdom. The conquered ruler, the lesser ruler, pledge fealty to the greater monarch. The ritual entail dividing sacrificial animals in two and placing the halves across from one another, thereby creating a pathway or aisle down which the lesser king would walk. At the end of that pathway the lesser king would kneel and pledge strict obedience and loyalty as a vassal of the sovereign ruler...... and if he ever violated that pledge then he would be cut in two like the animals through which he just walked.

The problem was God never showed up for Abraham to perform the ritual. He spent the rest of the day chasing the scavengers away until he was exhausted and fell asleep. That is when something remarkable happened. In Abraham's vision he saw symbols for God (the smoldering oven and flaming torch) performing the pledge of fealty. God pledged fealty to God on the penalty of His own death should He ever betray the Sovereign LORD. In other words, God took on both sides of the covenant. On that day God asked nothing of Abraham, but it was on that day the covenant was made (it had been initiated many decades earlier, but it was on that day the scripture state the making of the covenant.
Again you're bring up the Abrahamic Covenant.

It was not bidirectional between God and Abraham. It was bidirectional with God and God.
J...first of all it's not called BIDIRECTIONAL.
I've never heard this term used.

second...if it's BIDIRECTIONAL (your term) between God and God
then we say it's
UNILATERAL.
UNI....one sided...it's all done by God.
 
oh i just wanted people to know and understand WHY it is you all and others attack the divinity of CHRIST .
They had to do this within christendom in order to PUMP some progressive revelation
and put jesus as just another prophet so called amongst them false ones too . YOU SEE i know WHY they did this .
The thing is WHY do you and others seem to love this so . We supposed to LOVE TRUTH and not a lie .
Yet , hey tis not just you , heck about seventy plus percent of christendom now believes GOD is just fine with all religons .
JESUS , the dire need to BELEIVE HE IS CHRIST , BEEN DENIED . now who would do that .
WHO would support those who DENY JESUS is the CHRIST and make believe we all serving the same GOD .
A hint .
WHO IS A LIAR , HE who denies that JESUS IS THE CHRIST . HE BE ANTI CHRIST .
if a man believes not the TESTIMONY that GOD gave of the SON , well HE calls GOD a liar ,
SO yeah . THERE IS THAT . why do you all love a lie that wont save one soul but in reality shall lead the false religoins
NOT OUT OF DARKNESS but left trapped in it and worse to even help lead CHRISTENDOM into the same lie .
Man this wont bode well for any and all who were co helpers to that . SO , OUTTA LOVE for your soul , DARN sure not your doctrine ,
I must say time to repent and fast . I will be praying you do too .
@TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY
save-image.png
 
On the contrary. If you tell your son, "Go mow the lawn and take out the trash, and I will take you fishing". This is exactly the same context as what God told Abraham. It's foolish to believe that if your son rejected your instruction and went to his friend's house to play video games instead of obeying your instruction, you are still obligated to take him fishing. His action would imply he doesn't want to go fishing with you. The agreement is made null and void, based on what your son chose to do. There is no difference if you said, "If you mow the lawn and take out the trash, I will take you fishing".

The Abrahamic Covenant is:
UNILATERAL
UNCONDITIONAL

God ALONE will establish the Abrahamic Covenant.
There are no conditions on Abraham.
The Covenant will be fulfilled, no matter what Abraham does or does not do.


Take it or leave it.
These are the facts.
The "if" is implied.

In like manner, Jesus said,

John 14: 15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

It would be no different if Jesus had said "Love me and keep my commandments. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever;





First of all, it is absurd to believe that the only communication between God and Noah or Abram, is what is written in Scriptures. Here is what the text actually says;

Gen. 6: 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. 9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Gen. 12:1 "Now the LORD "had said" (Past tense) unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

You have nothing to prove that Abram hadn't already known God, or that God and Noah didn't speak with each other as they walked. What does it say?

Gen. 6: 17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. 18 But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee. 19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. 20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. 21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

22 Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.

4 So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

How do you know that Abrams whole family wasn't called, and only Abram and Lot answered? Did God destroy Sodom for unrighteousness, but never defined for them what Righteousness is? Did not Jesus say "Many" are called, but few are chosen"?

As it is written: "Today, if you hear His Voice, harden not your hearts"

There is nothing in any scriptures throughout the entire Bible that says, suggests, or implies that Abram didn't know God and trust HIM, before God told him to leave.




I understand that this philosophy you have adopted and are promoting and defending is a popular one, promoted by "Many" "who come in Christ's Name". But if Abram didn't "want to be chosen", he would not have "departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him".

The Philosophy that God chose to offer His covenant to Noah and Abram, but withheld the offer to the rest of the world and Sodom. Then destroyed the rest of the world, and Sodom because "GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually". But saved Noah and Abram based on nothing they did or believed, rather, by some unseen "Holy Lottery", is a widespread teaching, but the Scriptures don't support it, in my view.



You are promoting an entire religious philosophy founded on the belief that the only Words God spoke to Abram, is what is recorded in Scriptures. Abram was 50 or 60 years old when Noah died. Is it even possible that Abram didn't know the God of Noah at 75 years old?



You have nothing from Scriptures to support this philosophy. What we do know, was that sometime before Gen. 12:1, God had spoken to Abram and told him to leave on a Journey with God to a place he would later show him. And Abram trusted God, shown by Abram departing, as the Lord had instructed him, and Lot went with them.

You are adding to God's Word based on the assumption that the only Words spoken between Abram and God are recorded in Genesis.
 
oh i just wanted people to know and understand WHY it is you all and others attack the divinity of CHRIST .
They had to do this within christendom in order to PUMP some progressive revelation
and put jesus as just another prophet so called amongst them false ones too . YOU SEE i know WHY they did this .
The thing is WHY do you and others seem to love this so . We supposed to LOVE TRUTH and not a lie .
Yet , hey tis not just you , heck about seventy plus percent of christendom now believes GOD is just fine with all religons .
JESUS , the dire need to BELEIVE HE IS CHRIST , BEEN DENIED . now who would do that .
WHO would support those who DENY JESUS is the CHRIST and make believe we all serving the same GOD .
A hint .
WHO IS A LIAR , HE who denies that JESUS IS THE CHRIST . HE BE ANTI CHRIST .
if a man believes not the TESTIMONY that GOD gave of the SON , well HE calls GOD a liar ,
SO yeah . THERE IS THAT . why do you all love a lie that wont save one soul but in reality shall lead the false religoins
NOT OUT OF DARKNESS but left trapped in it and worse to even help lead CHRISTENDOM into the same lie .
Man this wont bode well for any and all who were co helpers to that . SO , OUTTA LOVE for your soul , DARN sure not your doctrine ,
I must say time to repent and fast . I will be praying you do too .
@TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY
save-image.png
 
It must be evident for you, my friend, that you represent only one of the many variants in which Christians understand this and other topics. This is more than evident if you go across this Forum.
So, I respectfully invite you to exercise care in not putting yourself in the position of spokesman for Christians by saying "we Christians".
Pancho,,,,I must say this:
@TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY is absolutely correct in his statement regarding the deity of Christ.

There may be variants, as you've stated...
but let me make this perfectly clear to you:

In order for a person to be defined as CHRISTIAN, that person MUST believe that Jesus is God.

If a person does NOT believe that Jesus is God,,,then he should not be defining himself as Christian.

It saddens me that these people put CHRISTIAN under their name and then do not adhere to Christian tenets.

In this regard....TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY is INDEED speaking in the name of all CHRISTIANS.

He is absolutely correct and it's not his fault or mine if we have people running around these forums calling themselves Christian who are NOT CHRISTIAN.

The analysis of any apparent contradiction in Scriptures by appealing to the philological, cultural and historical context is not exclusive of any religion. Many Christians apply this principle as well... including you. Isn't that true?
No. This is not true.
This is the problem here Pancho:
Instead of learning from accredited churches that preach and teach correct theology,,,
some read on their own and come up with their own personal theology...
thus causing much confusion within the Christian religion.

Like I've said, I can't remember who your illuminato is...was it Krishna?
How would YOU like it if different persons of the Baha'i faith taught differently than what Krishna taught?
(It wasn't Krishna,.....I'm sorry).
You'd be upset.
The other member and I are pretty upset over this but there's not much we can do about it.

Every CHRISTIAN denomination believes that Jesus is God.
Otherwise they are teaching heresy.
 
Pancho,,,,I must say this:
@TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY is absolutely correct in his statement regarding the deity of Christ.

There may be variants, as you've stated...
but let me make this perfectly clear to you:

In order for a person to be defined as CHRISTIAN, that person MUST believe that Jesus is God.
Neither @JoshebB nor me are discussing the deity of Christ here, my sister.
It is our brother @TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY who mentioned this off topic. I don’t know why. We have plenty of threads to discuss that subject.
 
Pancho,,,,I must say this:
@TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY is absolutely correct in his statement regarding the deity of Christ.

There may be variants, as you've stated...
but let me make this perfectly clear to you:

In order for a person to be defined as CHRISTIAN, that person MUST believe that Jesus is God.

If a person does NOT believe that Jesus is God,,,then he should not be defining himself as Christian.

It saddens me that these people put CHRISTIAN under their name and then do not adhere to Christian tenets.

In this regard....TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY is INDEED speaking in the name of all CHRISTIANS.

He is absolutely correct and it's not his fault or mine if we have people running around these forums calling themselves Christian who are NOT CHRISTIAN.


No. This is not true.
This is the problem here Pancho:
Instead of learning from accredited churches that preach and teach correct theology,,,
some read on their own and come up with their own personal theology...
thus causing much confusion within the Christian religion.

Like I've said, I can't remember who your illuminato is...was it Krishna?
How would YOU like it if different persons of the Baha'i faith taught differently than what Krishna taught?
(It wasn't Krishna,.....I'm sorry).
You'd be upset.
The other member and I are pretty upset over this but there's not much we can do about it.

Every CHRISTIAN denomination believes that Jesus is God.
Otherwise they are teaching heresy.
march ever onwards in the trenches dear sister .
 
Neither @JoshebB nor me are discussing the deity of Christ here, my sister.
It is our brother @TOTHALORDBEALLGLORY who mentioned this off topic. I don’t know why. We have plenty of threads to discuss that subject.
when you read my next post you gonna understand the why my friend . wait for it , it comes quickly
but not nearly as quickly as the First and the last who was dead and is alive . on that day , souls gonna be terrified who denied HIM
HIS gospel , His deity . just saying . wait for it i will send it soon .
 
Back
Top Bottom