Dispute Involving Paul, Jeremiah, and the Old and New Covenant
Dear reader,
There is in Seventh-day Adventist circles, an assault on the sanctity of Scripture as being trustworthy. It is being maintained by some SDA's that Paul of Scripture did not understand the meaning of the New Covenant and that he taught error concerning it. Also, that he contradicted himself and James regarding faith and works as a condition for salvation.
Dennis Kean, Corey Bray and Patti Berg, all members of the professing New Movement SDA church, are making these allegations and teaching them on the Internet. The following verses are called into their judgment and/or re-interpreted by them in a way to make Scripture contradict itself. They teach that only the express words spoken by Christ Himself in the New Teatament, and the words of God as expressly spoken to the Old Testament prophets are reliable. They say that the Old Testament prophets received verbal inspiriation by way of direct dictation from God, but that the New Testament writers wrote only their own personal opinion.
Hbr 8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, [that] thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.
Hbr 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
Hbr 8:7 For if that first [covenant] had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second
Hbr 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Hbr 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
Hbr 9:9 Which [was] a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
That was the fault of the Old Covenant's [TESTAMENT] initial means of absolving sin--the sacrifice of mere animals could not make him that did the service perfect. The Sacrifice of Christ, by which He proffered us His Divine Nature Holy Spirit life and soul, could make us perfect if we will submit to His will for us.
Kean suggests that since there is not sufficient evidence that such perfection has accrued; that plan failed and there will have to be yet another New Covenant or Testament consisting of the law being placed in the heart AFTER OR AT GLORIFICATION in the New Heaven and New Earth.
Ellen White said that persons without spiritual discernment would not recognize such perfection if they saw it! It will become evident within the confines of this document, that one Dennis Kean and Corey Bray, do not have the discernment to recognize perfection of God's saints, the 144,000, who are without guile, BEFORE THEY ARE TRANSLATED.
Hbr 9:10 [Which stood] only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed [on them] until the time of reformation.
Hbr 9:11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
Hbr 9:12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption [for us].
Hbr 9:13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
Hbr 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
The New Covenant provided the eternal Holy Spirit via the mediation and intercession of Christ's blood, to purge our conscience from dead works and be enabled to serve the living God and overcome sin. Dennis maintains that because sin still abounds, that the sacrifice mentioned in Hebrews 9:14 was not efficacious enough to fulfill Jeremiah 31:33, 34.
Hbr 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament [NEW COVENANT] that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions [that were] under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
Hbr 9:16 For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Hbr 9:17 For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Hbr 9:18 Whereupon neither the first [testament] was dedicated without blood.
Hbr 9:19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
Hbr 9:20 Saying, This [is] the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
Hbr 9:21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
Hbr 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Hbr 9:23 [It was] therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
Hbr 9:24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, [which are] the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
Hbr 9:25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
Hbr 9:26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Hbr 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Hbr 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
Hbr 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than [that of] Abel.
Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.
Clearly, the New Covenant did not do away with all of the elements of the Old Covenant, but God's Word does say what elements were done away with to constitute the Everlasting Covenant as a NEW COVENANT. Paul is the most prolific New Testament writer on the New Covenant, yet Kean and friends conclude that Paul made a mistake in discerning the real meaning of Jeremiah 31:32, 33.
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
They teach that since Christ told the disciples to teach the world the gospel, that Jeremiah 31:34 (above) must apply only in the New Earth. Their teaching is that the Old Covenant could never be abrogated because it involves salvation--that is the true part of their teaching. They do not discern that it is because certain ceremonial ordinance aspects of the Old Covenant Sanctuary Service, no longer apply, that this is what constitutes a "New" but "SAME" Old Covenant. Here is their thesis:
"The New Covenant as promoted by much of Christianity is not rightly understood. A single passage in Scriptures is used as evidence to promote an idea that simply cannot stand up to the test of the Scriptural standard. Sound beliefs are not supported by a single reference. Experienced students of truth recognize the need of multiple references to support a cornerstone belief.
Ron's Commentary: All the MANY scriptures I have provided are apropos and supportive to the real facts of the issue. Ironically enough, it is Dennis Kean who is building his thesis primarily on one scripture, Jeremiah 31:34.
Parting with the so-called "Old" Covenant as many other Christians do, our Adventist foundation is placed in jeopardy. The function of the Sanctuary becomes suspect if the old covenant has been ended and made irrelevant. But more than the Advent faith this negation erodes the very credibility of Christianity at large. By annulling the central promise of the everlasting Covenant, Christianity is emptied of its greatest value. Rather than shun, we need to seek out the meaning of this invaluable covenant."
Ron's Commentary: The greatest promise of the Everlasting Covenant is the promise that we may partake of the Divine Nature of Christ for the purpose of overcoming the lust and corruption's of the world. Dennis' theory that we do not now have the promise of the law put into our hearts, is tantamount to denying the greatest promise of the Everlasting Covenant. So he achieves the same thing he accuses Christianity of when he says:
"By annulling the central promise of the everlasting Covenant, Christianity is emptied of its greatest value. Rather than shun, we need to seek out the meaning of this invaluable covenant."
2Pe 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
The Old Covenant has not been made irrelevant! God specified what elements of that Covenant were nailed to the cross! The entire Sanctuary Service is dismantled by Dennis' argument. End note.
Dennis says:
"The New Covenant, however, will be a reality far into the future, but until then and beyond, God's promise for the salvation of mankind will endure. God's Covenant with Israel is an everlasting promise for all people, which God intends to keep forever. It was signed with the blood of the Savior and confirmed as an everlasting promise of salvation."
Ron's Commentary: We can have the law in our hearts now by partaking of the Divine Nature of Jesus Christ. The New Covenant is Christ in us the hope of glory by faith into His grace wherein we stand and rejoice. Like a Jesuit futurist, Dennis places the NOW reality of Christ is us the hope of glory--far into the future.
Col 1:27 To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
Eph 1:18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,
Errors of Dennis Kean and His Friends
Dennis fails to discern that Scripture plainly states what was annulled in the Old Covenant. What was scrapped was not the salvific efficacy associated with the Old Covenant, the death of the antitypical Lamb, Jesus Christ, to become our Saviour and Redeemer, but certain school-teacher elements of that Everlasting Covenant that pointed forward to the ultimate Lamb sacrifice. It was the law as contained in ordinances that waxed old and was replaced by better promises.
Dennis presents the Everlasting Covenant theme as being an allegorical account, but he leaves out very pertinent facts of that account that was not only allegorical but very real--as real as the Sanctuary Service. The Everlasting Covenant as evinced by the Sanctuary Service, provided for a temporary means of absolving sin vis-à-vis animal sacrifice until the antitypical Lamb should be offered up.
When Christ died, the veil was rent in the Sanctuary, signifying that the sacrificial system aspect of the Sanctuary Service was abrogated. That is what Scripture means when it says that the Old Testament Covenant was ended and a New Covenant ensued. The New Covenant was a continuation of the Old as far as salvific efficacy was involved, but it did of necessity do away with some aspects of the Old, as just defined and further defined by Scripture as follows:
Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, [so] making peace;
Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Col 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
Hbr 9:1 Then verily the first [covenant] had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
It was because of the above defined changes that the Old Covenant was of necessity changed, and an Old-New Covenant ensued. It was called a New Covenant because of the omission of that which had been fulfilled in the initial covenant or the Old, original Covenant, namely the sacrifice of the antitypical Lamb, which the law as contained in ordinances, as a lesson book, pointed forward to.
Dennis Kean's View of the Old Covenant
"The common explanation of what the Old Covenant represents, is that God made an agreement with Israel and promised them certain advantages. He gave them guidelines on how to carry out their part of the covenant. All Israel had to do was follow. But though sad or even tragic, Israel did not do their part and God had to break His covenant with them. Furthermore, for various specified reasons, the Old Covenant was not good enough and had to be replaced with a new and better covenant. The "Old Covenant" "...waxeth old..." Heb 8:13 and required that it should be replaced with a new and "better covenant, which was established upon better promises" (Heb 8:6 KJV).
The Savior's death is viewed as the moment when the Old Covenant was replaced by the New Covenant. As Paul intimates, the Old Covenant was not good enough "For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second." (Heb 8:7 KJV). God, consequently, brought in a new and better covenant and sealed it with the blood of His beloved Son. Under this New Covenant, however, not all things were the same. What was changed from the Old Covenant and what was not changed has been under intense debate."
Ron's Commentary: There is no need for debate as to what was changed from the Old Covenant. The Bible explicitly explains what was changed and nailed to the cross. End note.
More of Kean's Serious Errors
The remaining portion is Kean's erroneous teachings. I will interject commentaries.
"One of the enduring principles of Christian theological studies is to backup a view with more than a single Scriptural passage. This is done in order to reduce the chances for error. Yet, unlike other theological ideas, the Old and New covenant idea relies on a single Biblical passage."
Ron's Commentary: The SDA position relies on the Sanctuary Service and all the verses associated with it. Dennis Kean's view destroys the Sanctuary message by denying what God says was eliminated under the CHANGED "New" Covenant. Kean thereby denies the efficacy of Christ's sacrifice and His proffered Divine Nature for enabling our overcoming in this life. End note.
"But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. (Heb 8:6-13 KJV)
Due to its summary nature, this passage is used to umbrella, and supercede all other Scriptural definitions and explanations of covenants between God and man. This explanation is one of the very few if not alone in its genre."
Ron's Commentary: The historic SDA view relies on the entire Sanctuary Service. It is Dennis' view that relies on a perversion of Heb. 8:6-13, to deny the entire Sanctuary Message, thus, he is guilty of his own charge. End note.
"As Adventists, we are too familiar with the issues, which spring out from the covenants. Were it not for the Sabbath we would join the rest of Christianity in their view. The Sabbath, however, places an obstacle in our way and we are forced to reevaluate the nature of the New Covenant and how it affects our other views. We have learned to tread carefully on this point. Others take an extreme view and intimate that the Law of God is placed in the heart of the believer and therefore done away with entirely, but their arguments run into briers as they attempt to justify them. Most, however, use a more moderate approach. They carefully excise the Sabbath from the law and grasp for whatever arguments come along to support their position.
Though there are many more than these three groups of thought, on the subject of the Covenant, most if not all of them fall within the boundaries of these three. In the rest of this study these three groups will be referred to as conservatives, moderates and extremists, Adventists being conservatives.
Needless to say, the positions of all of the above three groups are steeped in difficult theological ambiguities. If there is an Old Covenant, then what was it? Why was it imperfect? Few dare to define it. The mere definition of the Old Covenant is a battleground and it is just one of many hard questions. Deeper investigation into the nature of the Old Covenant brings the house down and rather than clarification, much harder questions arise. For that reason most of us prefer and are more at ease with simplistic and common explanations. Why ask difficult questions when easy ones bring less grief. Yet, the time to ask difficult questions is inevitable if we are to advance. In this study we will discuss many of these hard questions.
Ron's Commentary: God dared to define the difference between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. Scripture tells us explicitly why it was imperfect--because it could not make the comers to it perfect! End note.
Ingredients shuffled
The covenant with Israel was composed of many parts all to which they agreed with one voice. There was the moral law. There were civil laws. There were ceremonial laws. There were health laws. There were personal sanitary laws. There were community sanitary laws and possibly a few other types of laws. But now the "...old waxeth away..." and the New Covenant has come to replace it. The compelling question comes to mind. "So, which laws were abolished by the New Covenant?"
Ron's Commentary: A foolish question when the Word says expressly what was abolished and nailed to the cross! End note:
"Conservatives carefully extract the Ceremonial laws and some, due to pressure by extremists, allow for a few additional though limited extractions. The Pharisaic custom of washings is categorized as being a part of the ceremonial laws and dispensed with, while we visit the nearest supermarket and find ourselves buying dozens of chemicals to clean our home and bodies with. Nevertheless, the Conservatives' defense has some strong points, but they are quite vulnerable in defending the issue of a law written in their hearts. Clearly, if God promised that He would "write them in their hearts", then what value is there in dealing with it in written or explicit form? For them the role of the "heart written law" and its explanations are vague at best."
Ron's Commentary: Dennis demonstrates his lack of spiritual discernment by not being able to see the purpose of the written explicit form of the law! Scripture tells us that the law is perfect, converting the soul. There are many souls not yet converted. So the written or explicit form of the law still serves as a mirror that one may see him/herself a sinner and thereby be converted. Dennis is a great mind mathematically and in the physics field, yet he lacks spiritual discernment to see the purpose of the Holy Law of God by which all men will be judged. Why would God remove the written law from the sacred canon when men will be converted and/or judged by that law. Is this a "VAGUE AT BEST" explanation? Would it be fair for God to impute sin without a warning definition of sin?! Oh the foolishness of "great minds!" They become wise in their own folly, as did the most intelligent of the angels--Lucifer. End note.
The moderates have the same problem as the conservatives. But they go a little further. They take out the Sabbath, the Ceremonial laws, and the washings and ignore the other laws, hoping that no one will notice their existence. They realize that health, civil, sanitary etc. laws are required, in everyday living, but they wish that Moses had not mentioned them, since they complicate a clean cut-off of the "Old Covenant". They assert that in the New Covenant, the Law is written right into the heart of the believer. This plays a major role in the moderate's perspective, though in reality it seems to make little impact, if any, on the average life of a believer. Man was a sinner before Calvary and it may very well be that he is an even greater sinner today. So how did it make a difference when God decided to "write them in their hearts"? What advantage was there to the New Covenant?"
Ron's Commentary: Here Dennis Kean plays God AGAIN, and aspires to the judgment seat in concluding judgement reserved only to God, as to the efficacy of the Atoning act of Jesus Christ, and His proffered Divine Nature Holy Spirit in the lives of men and the ability of the Holy Spirit to change lives. God says that there will be at least 144,000 who will comprise His bride, and a numberless throng of bridesmaids at the wedding. The bride is without guile, but Dennis Kean cannot discern her in the making of herself ready, and Ellen White says that Dennis would not recognize her if he saw her! Just because all men have not been made perfect by the law being placed in the heart of some men, Dennis faults the efficacy of Christ's greatest gift--His Holy Spirit life and soul to the heart of man. Blasphemy! End note.
"The extremists, however, with little sense of right and wrong, and a touch of anarchism, negate the need for any law. They reason that "God has the power to write His moral laws into the heart and who needs anything more than that?" A good and moral individual should know how to conduct him/herself in all spheres of existence. Everything sounds good to them until they are mugged for the first time. Then, a few subtle doubts begin to haunt them from time to time. The imperative need for civil authority to enforce the civil law makes a deeper impression on them. From then on their philosophical world does not seem quite as pure as before. Nevertheless, many of them find a refuge in words like "If all were Christians we would not need civil laws etc..." and hold on to their view."
Ron's Commentary: Dennis unwittingly puts himself in the camp of the anarchists, for he admits that he does not see any results of the law of God being placed in the hearts of repentant mankind. That is tantamount to negating the need for any law! Dennis betrayed his view of any need for an explicit written law and/or written in the hear of man, when he said: Clearly, if God promised that He would "write them in their hearts", then what value is there in dealing with it in written or explicit form? For them the role of the "heart written law" and its explanations are vague at best," thereby not being capable of seeing the necessity or the purpose of either! End note.
The Inconsistencies
"As we probe the question deeper we come up short on many essential points. What difference does the New Covenant make? If a law is written within the heart, then how come sin continues? When the New Covenant is implemented all should know God from the least to the greatest. No man would be able to tell another, "Let me tell you about my God..." as the prophet had specified in God's address of the New Covenant. Yet, the Savior Himself commissioned His disciples to Go out and preach to the neighbors, "Know the Lord..." This amounts to an oxymoron.
Ron's Commentary: The emboldened question displays great ignorance and lack of understanding. Dennis' first foolish logic implies that if the law of God is implanted in the heart, it would needs be in the heart of all men, so sin should not continue! How ignorant can a "smart" mathematician and physics person get?! Dennis is operating from the erroneous premise of a wrong interpretation of Jeremiah 31:34, wherein it says men will not teach one another anymore. His erroneous interpretation leads to a number of very serious and foolish conclusions. Here is the text:
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
The SDA Bible Commentary offers the following reasonable explanation:
"Shall teach no more.--The failure of God's servants in large part to instruct the people in the real knowledge of God, because of the perfunctory performance of the observances and ceremonies of the old covenant, was to be corrected by the intimate acquaintance and fellowship believers would have with their Lord through the faith stimulated by the new covenant (see John 6:45, 46; I Cor. 2:6-16; Col. 1:27, 28).
Believers would have no need to instruct one another because they would have the Holy Spirit's presence to show them all things:
Jhn 14:26 But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
The Divine Nature of Christ's Holy Spirit was not proffered before the cross. That gift was to empower mankind to overcome as Christ overcame. To deny the success of that gift is to deny the entire efficacy of the Incarnation sacrifice. That is what Dennis Kean's teaching does! End note.
"Since this covenant was made with certain individuals and not with all humanity, and salvation is a part of this covenant, it is clear that salvation cannot and has not been offered to all humanity. It is an elite-group covenant and cannot be applied to any other than those that enter into the agreement. Yet, studying the Scriptures we find out otherwise. The covenant made with Israel was not a different covenant from that which God made with Abraham. It was the same covenant."
Ron's Commentaries: The Everlasting Covenant was made to provide salvation to all men. As all men were made sinners by Adam's sin, so ALL MEN are
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life.
Tts 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
End note:
"And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. (Gen 17:19 KJV)
God remembered the covenant He made with Abraham and engaged to accomplish all that was needed to fulfill His promises.
And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob. (Exo 2:24 KJV)
It may be a surprise, but the covenant, which God made with Abraham, was meant to be everlasting. That of course is a serious problem. How could an everlasting covenant ever be broken? How could an everlasting covenant ever grow old? How could an everlasting covenant ever be discarded, and be replaced with a new one?
Critics may argue that God made an everlasting covenant with Abraham, but He did not make an everlasting covenant with Israel and thus separate the covenant into two separate covenants. But that will not do. If there really were two covenants, then both of them were intended to be everlasting covenants according to Scriptures.
Ron's Commentary: There is no serious problem. God's Covenant was fulfilled to the letter. Because man broke it, that does not negate the covenant as being Everlasting on God's part. Aspects of the Everlasting Covenant which played a sequential part in its fulfillment could grow old and be no longer applicable, such as animal sacrifices which were designed to be limited from the inception of the covenant, UNTIL CHRIST, THE ANTYTYPICAL LAMB should be sacrificed. This is spiritual pabulum, but Dennis cannot see it. The Old and New Covenants are one and the same with different aspects accruing to each. End note.
And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. (Gen 17:7 KJV)
And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. (Gen 17:8 KJV)
Verse seven is no problem, but verse eight is. God promises to give the land of Canaan to Abraham's posterity for ever, but we all know that literal Canaan though given, to them, has not been theirs for a long time and even today is not wholly theirs. The question comes to mind. Does God keep His covenants? And if there was a chance that they would not keep their part of the bargain, why was this covenant not made with a conditional clause? "If you and they do all according to our agreement, then..."
Ron's Commentary: God's promise to Abraham and his posterity was conditional upon their obedience as are many other Old Testament promises to the Jews. God gave many conditions to Israel and everyone of them were based on obedience, to wit:
Exd 19:5 Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth [is] mine: End note:
(Repeated for continuity purposes): "And if there was a chance that they would not keep their part of the bargain, why was this covenant not made with a conditional clause? "If you and they do all according to our agreement, then..."
The answer is there, but it is not obvious. In verse seven God tells Abraham "...in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. At that moment it was clear that God was the God of Abraham, but after Abraham dies, what value is there in saying to him ", to be a God unto thee..." God is a God to the living and not unto the dead! Something does not sound right in this. Is God making a promise for the literal Israel or is literal Israel an allegoric symbol for those who will be saved and alive with Abraham in a better world? The answer is found in Isaiah.
He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root: Israel shall blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit. Hath he smitten him, as he smote those that smote him? or is he slain according to the slaughter of them that are slain by him? In measure, when it shooteth forth, thou wilt debate with it: he stayeth his rough wind in the day of the east wind. By this therefore shall the iniquity of Jacob be purged; and this is all the fruit to take away his sin; when he maketh all the stones of the altar as chalkstones that are beaten in sunder, the groves and images shall not stand up. (Isa 27:6-9 KJV)
It is clear that Jacob and Israel are used, here, as allegoric symbols of all those who in the end will be saved. In prophecy, Jacob and Israel are frequently, if not always, used to depict those who will eventually be saved, whereas Jacob's brother Esau is always used to refer to those who will be lost to eternity. We can find one example of that in Jeremiah. Jeremiah refers to Esau and says:
Flee ye, turn back, dwell deep, O inhabitants of Dedan; for I will bring the calamity of Esau upon him, the time that I will visit him. If grape gatherers come to thee, would they not leave some gleaning grapes? if thieves by night, they will destroy till they have enough. But I have made Esau bare, I have uncovered his secret places, and he shall not be able to hide himself: his seed is spoiled, and his brethren, and his neighbours, and he is not. (Jer 49:8-10 KJV)
And how do we know that these prophecies are about the end of time, rather than some literal time that may even have past? Esau and his families had settled in Edom. Often, Esau is referred to as Edom, in the Scriptures. In line with that, Isaiah speaks of the Savior in prophecy:
Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength? I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save. Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the winefat? I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them [Edom] in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment. For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come. (Isa 63:1-4 KJV)
Many prophets pick up this theme. An interesting example is found in the book of Obadiah. The entire book is dedicated to Esau, a man who died long before these prophecies about him were written. If you are interested to study the subject of Jacob and Esau in allegory, you can find it in "Predestined to play a role". If you just want to study it in the Scriptures, here are some additional references, which you will find illuminating.
(Mal 1:1-4 KJV), (Ezek 32:29 KJV), (Joel 3:19 KJV), (Ezek 35:1-15 KJV), (Isa 34:6 KJV), (Obadiah)
When the Son of God came to our fallen world, to set the prisoners free, He spoke to them in parables. In the same way, the prophets speak to us in parables. The author was the same in both instances. Allegory is the only way that we can understand prophecy or we would have to call God a liar. I am happy to tell you that God is not a liar! Everything that God promised, He has or will carry out. The hard part is to understand God's perspective. God does not look at the future in terms of days, months of decades, like we do. He makes long term plans, which encompass centuries and millennia and then tells His prophets all that He plans to do. Nothing remains hidden.
Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets. (Amos 3:7 KJV)....
Living Parables and Salvation
So, what does all this mean? Now that we realize that the experiences of these individuals were used to paint a prophetic perspective, we are ready to understand that the Covenant made with Israel was allegoric. It was a play on the theme of a covenant made with the people of the entire world by way of a live parable. Through Israel God wanted to say that He made a covenant with all the people who would repent and seek forgiveness from Him. All those who would repent, like Jacob, are named Israel. Jacob was named Israel in the night of his trouble, when he struggled with God over forgiveness of his sins. It does not matter whether people know all the steps that the Israelites were familiarized with. God has extended His covenant to all those who repent. God made a covenant with all people of the world, in which He promised that if they would repent and come seeking forgiveness from Him, they would be accepted and forgiven. It is the same message given to Adam. God instructed Adam in this matter as well. It was the first thing God did when Adam sinned.
Ron's Commentary: God's covenant with Israel was more than an allegory. His promises to them were real and based on their obedience.
al·le·go·ry
a. The representation of abstract ideas or principles by characters, figures, or events in narrative, dramatic, or pictorial form.
b. A story, picture, or play employing such representation. John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress and Herman Melville's Moby Dick are allegories.
c. A symbolic representation: The blindfolded figure with scales is an allegory of justice.
Truly, the entire symbolism of Abraham and Isaac was a representation of the sacrifice of the Father of His Son Christ Jesus. But the promises made to Israel based on the condition of their obedience were valid and not make believe dramatics by way of allegory. End note.
And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them. (Gen 3:21 KJV)
God instructed Adam and delivered to him all the necessary information on how to seek forgiveness. Through the slaying of the lamb, He promised Adam that He would bring him back to Eden. Adam probably did not quite understand the ultimate meaning of the lamb, but that was not a prerequisite. And as we can see, Adam's children learned about this, as well. The Old Covenant, clearly, was delivered, not only to Israel, but also to Adam.
And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: (Gen 4:4 KJV)
Most importantly, the heart of the Old Covenant was not ceremony, as it is wrongly assessed by so many. At the heart of the Old Covenant stands the Savior as a promise that through Him alone sins could be forgiven. Now that we understand that, we can derive meaning from Daniel's comment in his chapter 9:
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. (Dan 9:27 KJV)
When the Savior came, He did not come to break-off the Old Covenant. Quite to the contrary! He came to confirm it!
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (Mat 5:17 KJV)
In essence, the first covenant was a promise of the Savior. Through the sacrificial system the promise for a Savior was made. The promise for forgiveness could not have stood in the Great Controversy, had not the Savior come to portray the character of God. At the cross God's character was tested and found to be pure. As He rose from the grave and entered heaven, a new song is sung to Him.
Ron's Commentary: Yes indeed, the Everlasting Covenant was a promise of a Saviour, and when the types of that promise were fulfilled by the coming of the True Lamb, the types waxed old and passed away. But the law, which is perfect and converts the soul did not pass away. The passing away of certain elements of the Everlasting Covenant, did not negate the Everlastingness of its purpose--Salvation of man. End note.
And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; (Rev 5:9 KJV)
How could the Savior be found worthy, if there was no doubt about his worth? And now that He has been found worthy, He is given judgement and power to extend mercy and justice as He sees fit. Such judgement, now, had eternal value and could be backed by all beings, who, through the Cross, saw the nature of His character. The promise of forgiveness in its complete sense could not stand on the promise alone. It had to be confirmed by none other than the Son of God.
If God's Son was to rule as Judge of the sinners, His character had to be tested. In the plan of Salvation it became a fundamental requirement. From before man's fall, it was God's plan that His Son would be given as sureness for the covenant with mankind, if the human race should fall. Prophets spoke of this:
I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; (Isa 42:6 KJV)
Thus saith the LORD, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages; (Isa 49:8 KJV)
Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, (1 Pet 1:20 KJV)
As we can see, the Old Covenant is not really an old and ailing covenant in want of "better promises"! It is an everlasting covenant with the Savior as the central element of the promise. If this covenant should ever be broken, its promissory advantages would have to be annulled and the Savior's death would have been in vain. Furthermore, the sinners could never be forgiven!
Ron's Commentary: Certain aspects of the Old Covenant, eg. animal sacrifices, certainly were wanting of "better promises."
Hbr 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. End note.
Dennis Kean Says Paul and Scripture Contradict
(Dennis cont)
"Wait a minute?
Wow! That was a handful! Some would cry out, "HERESEY!" at this point. Did not Paul himself say that the Old Covenant "waxeth old..." So, how could this be?
In order to understand this ambiguity we need to be reminded that Paul is not God. Paul and the disciples all believed that the Savior would return shortly. They educated others in this. Many believe that Paul was so inspired that every word that left his lips was the direct word of God. Yet, he and other disciples urged the followers that the Savior's return was imminent. Two thousand years later we are still waiting and if those were God's own words, we would have the right to feel betrayed. God, whose character was so pure and righteous that angels found him worthy of being a Judge, would now revert to false advertisement to press His followers into line. I can hear the reply, "Oh it is too depressing for them to find out the truth!"
Ron's Commentary: Dennis does not realize that there are other options. If the gospel had continued to be spread by the "faithful" Jews as it should have been, Christ could have come ere this. Ellen White said the same thing about SDAs! Also, time in Scripture is relevant. Even Christ said that His coming was imminent:
Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
Notice the context of the above verse in words spoken by Jesus Himself:
27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together. 29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. 32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. Mat 24:27-34.
Will Dennis Kean and friends indict God for contradicting Himself, or is there another meaning to the above scenario? There is! See SDA Bible Commentary on this passage of Scripture. End note.
Prophecies need to be studied carefully and when God says "shortly", we need to study the context, to understand how it was meant and within what context He is taking. Context cannot be separated from text. To understand Paul properly, we need to understand that Paul was in the process of learning about God. We all are. Some of his comments have changed, as he learned about deeper truths and implications. At one point in his understanding Paul asserts adamantly:
(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. (Rom 2:13 KJV)
Later, on another occasion, he denies this:
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. (Rom 3:20 KJV)
Is this a problem? Does God allow men to contradict themselves? Why not? Paul makes no claim that these are words that rolled out of the mouth of God. We make those claims! We take words out of context and apply them wrongly. One pertinent example is where Paul says that all Scripture is inspired of God:
Ron's Commentary: I told Dennis earlier on an SDA Internet forum that Paul was instructing Jews who believed that they were saved by their own works and not works motivated by faith in and love for Christ. When Paul says doers of the law shall be justified, that is what he is referring to--Holy Spirit empowered, love and faith engendered works. But now I know why Dennis rejected my interpretation! End note.
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (2 Tim 3:16 KJV)
Some Christians fail to consider that the New Testament was not compiled or canonized at that time. It took another three centuries for this to happen. Paul's reference was an opinion concerning the books of the Old Testament. It was not a self-certification. In fact, a much more precise and pertinent comment comes from the lips of the Savior Himself and we seem to ignore that, in favor of Paul's analysis.
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Mat 4:4 KJV)
Ron's Commentary: According to Dennis, God did not anticipate that the New Testament would be added to the Sacred Canon, when he inspired 2 Tim 3:16. Guess His omniscience failed Him! Notice that Dennis has Paul giving only his personal opinion! And according to Dennis, Peter must have had the same delusion:
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost.
Luk 7:28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.
John the Baptist was the greatest of prophets, but according to Dennis Kean, since he was not of the Old Testament, his testimony must be faulty, and we cannot take it as the inspired Word of God.
Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified [it] by his angel unto his servant John:
End note.
The Nature of Inspiration
The words of the Savior bring us to the point where we need to discuss the nature of inspiration. The prophets of old understood this clearly. It was not hard, for God Himself did the dictations. For them it was not a matter of ideas coming into the mind. God spoke to these individuals clearly and directly with chosen words from His own mind.
The LORD spake also unto me again, saying,... (Isa 8:5 KJV)
For the LORD spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me that I should not walk in the way of this people, saying,... (Isa 8:11 KJV)
But, Peter analyzes the situation of inspiration and says:
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2 Pet 1:21 KJV)
Upon closer examination we realize that this analysis is only applicable to prophets when they speak before people. Strangely, however, these prophets do not breathe as they speak, while the words that come from their mouth are not theirs and consequently they cannot be called inspiration! The special state, that they are in, indicates that something extraordinary is going on. The individual is not in charge of what is being said. This is very important to understand. It is very different from being impressed with truth and giving it one's own explanation or twist. This is the reason that the Savior was so very specific in His reply: "...Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God..."
Well, that may be true, but when the prophets sit down to write, then the impression/inspiration link kicks in! Right? Does it? Writing under the inspiration of God is not done as some imagine. The prophets did not pen the Word of God through some spiritually osmotic pressure in their mind. These men heard the very voice of God, word for word. Upon hearing it, they faithfully recorded every word that rolled off God's lips.
Moreover the LORD said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen concerning Mahershalalhashbaz. (Isa 8:1 KJV)
Thus speaketh the LORD God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book. (Jer 30:2 KJV)
God was not haphazard about how to record His words. He instructed the prophets how to identify His words.
Then the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying, Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned. And thou shalt say to Jehoiakim king of Judah, Thus saith the LORD; Thou hast burned this roll, saying, Why hast thou written therein, saying, The king of Babylon shall certainly come and destroy this land, and shall cause to cease from thence man and beast? (Jer 36:29 KJV)
Before recording anything, the prophets of God were compelled to prefix God's dictated words with, " Thus saith the LORD!" Upon reading these words the student of truth could not be mistaken. The words, which the prophets recorded, were indeed words, which came out of God's mouth, for God dictated it to them with His own voice. Other words than these, as we will see all have inaccuracies. God's words do not suffer with this problem.
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it. (Isa 55:11 KJV)
The word of God is that word which leaves God's mouth. For some people this is too hard to accept, but the Scriptures are repleat with this counsel. God's word does not emanate from the mind of the prophets or some special spiritually gifted individuals in some mind sharing mode called inspiration. God dictates His word to the prophet.
I understand that some readers may fear these implications, but I want to assure you that this insight, in the long run, will remove all the indignities, which Christianity suffers from critics. God is not man and God does not contradict Himself. Paul, however, contradicted James and Peter and had theological differences with most of the disciples. Paul would say:
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (Rom 3:28 KJV)
While James, upon hearing such comments would come back with:
Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? (James 2:17-21 KJV)
But Paul counters:
Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. (Rom 4:9 KJV)
Yet, the Savior speaks like James. When asked directly on how salvation is obtained, He replied with clarity:
And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? (Mark 10:17 KJV)
And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. (Mark 10:18 KJV)
Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. (Mark 10:19 KJV)
There is no suggestion of any idea that Salvation is by faith alone, devoid of works. The Savior's parting words reaffirm this point with additional clarity:
And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. (Rev 22:12 KJV)
The purpose of a Witness
So how was Abraham justified? Was it through works or by faith? If we assert that both of these men were "Equally inspired", we must also accept that God contradicts Himself. But, such is not the case. The Savior's disciples were not chosen to record what God would tell them to speak, like the prophets of old. They were commissioned to witness to the world.
And ye are witnesses of these things. (Luke 24:48 KJV)
To be sure that this is clear, the function of a witness is not the same as that of a prophet. They are entirely different and mutually exclusive A witness cannot be influenced or coerced into saying something other than what they perceive with their own mind, else their witness is not true! Such witnessing is without value. Even on planet earth we do not summon a witness to the stand to say what others want them to say. We try to extract as accurately as possible what the witness saw and ignore any extraneous inspirations and/or manipulations that may have influenced the witness. The genuine impressions of a witness have far greater value than coercion or manipulations to witness what someone else may want the witness to say.
The Savior's life on planet earth was a special time. It led to a great event on planet earth and this superlative event needed to be witnessed. The crucifixion of the Savior of the world was the superlative moment of all time. Nothing equal has ever happened in the history of the universe. It was the moment when the great love of God came to light. It was not a time where God needed more prophets to tell the people more prophetic content. It was a time when the words of the prophets were being fulfilled. The eyes of the universe were transfixed on that hill where God's love came to the light. The need of a witness in a time such as this was imperative. The rest of the world would need to hear about the Savior of the world, much more from a witness, than from someone who is told or coerced in what to say! It was necessary to show, from man's perspective, the impact that the Son of God had on those who came in contact with Him. John speaks of his impression:
In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. (John 1:4-5 KJV) ... That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. (John 1:9-11 KJV) ... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, ( and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14 KJV)
Many claim that these were inspired words of God, but the words " and we beheld his glory" tell us otherwise. We do not need to be apprehensive and feel that the entire Christian hope is lost, if one of the disciples contradicted another disciple with their personal testimony and or opinions. If you think about it, such contradictions disqualify the critic's charge that the disciples colluded, in what to say! Many contradictions exist in the New Testament, but they are not damaging. Only God could assemble imperfection and make it so functional that it overwhelms the critic's arguments. In that sense, we can see great value in the New Testament, but to claim "total consistency" is not to be familiar with the subject.
Ron's Commentary:
Eph 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
Was it the WILL OF GOD that Paul would give erring personal opinion? End note.
When to Believe
Now that fears are behind us, we need to understand how Paul deduced that "the New Covenant replaced the Old one." Paul believed in the imminent return of the Savior. To him and the disciples the end was around the corner. They understood a few of the prophecies and felt that that was all that was needed. They lined up the prophecies as best they knew and like the Adventists in 1844, they used their minds to reason out how it would all come about. What they did not realize was that the end would not come for another three millennia. More importantly, prophecies of the future can never be understood in their entirety until they are fulfilled. This is an important lesson, which the Savior taught them.
And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe. (John 14:29 KJV)
Notice that the Savior is not asking people to believe before hand. He clearly postponed belief for a time after prophecy is fulfilled. Frequently, prophecy is presented as if it should be understood and believed before it is fulfilled. The Scriptures testify otherwise. But that does not stop people who are eager to fascinate others with their imaginings. Like the TV show with Roxella and her husband, people focus on future prophecy exclusively. Too many are transfixed, if not obsessed, with what is going to happen in the future. In this state they miss the far greater advantages of fulfilled prophecies. Fulfilled prophecy is the bird in the hand, while future prophecy is the bird in the bush. Joy and encouragement is viable or possible primarily in fulfilled prophecies. That is not to say that future prophecies are thoroughly useless. Future prophecies give us anticipation and educate us in what God is trying to accomplish, but they do not supercede or compare to "fulfilled" prophecies. When we talk about prophecies we should keep this in mind. The proper understanding of fulfilled prophecies is a rich gift from God.
Ron's Commentary: God prophesied to Adam and Eve that they would die if they ate of the tree of Knowledge of good and evil. According to Dennis, they need not have believed Him until they ate! Where there is no vision the people fail. We have a prophecy of Christ's second coming and to be ready for it. Should we wait until it happens in order to see if it is true? Should the faithful Jews not heeded the prophesied destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, 3 1/2 years before it was fulfilled? There are more examples that we should understand prophesies before they are fulfilled. Let him that understands count the number of the beast, etc., etc. End note.
The issue of Infallibility
Paul, like the rest of us, studied prophecies. Yet, he was a man and not God. His estimations and personal arguments, though often good and occasionally brilliant, at times did not make it over the fence. Believing that he was living in the "End times", he studied prophecies and rendered them the best way he knew how. But the Jewish people held on to their traditions dearly. Paul realized that he needed arguments to convince the public that the Sanctuary services were transferred above and upon reading Jeremiah chapter 31 an idea came to him. "End of the world time" and "God placing His law in the hearts of men" sounded good. As far as he was concerned the Savior would return shortly and though a little early it was a perfect time for God to put His law in the hearts of men. You may think this to be a faulty analysis, but the proof is that Paul believed that in his time the Gospel was preached to every creature.
If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; (Col 1:23 KJV)
Ron's Commentary: Even Ellen White said that the gospel went to the then known world. That was the meaning of Paul's statement. End note.
With this belief in heart it was tempting to interpret Jeremiah's prophecies as an immediate phenomenon. A closer study, however, will prove that Jeremiah's chapter 31 did not apply to the time of Paul or any time near. Much to the dismay of Paul and the disciples, the Savior did not return as they hoped in a short time. The world was a much larger place than Paul imagined. There were continents and nations that they were not aware of. More importantly, God's plans were far more complex and bigger than anticipated.
However, Paul employed Jeremiah chapter thirty-one to drive a valid point. The sacrificial system was no longer to be performed on earth. He could have used Daniel's prophecy to drive his point, but for whatever reason he did not. Daniel, however, was told about a time when the sacrificial system would cease. He recorded the angel's words:
And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, ... (Dan 9:27 KJV)
Ron's Commentary: Paul application of Jeremiah 31, and Daniel's prophecy in Dan. 9:27, are not antagonistic to one another. End note.
Paul sought to find support for this point and mistakenly indicted Jeremiah's prophecy, which was a future prophecy, something not meant to be understood in his time. It is a prophecy that does not even apply to our time today. It reaches beyond the Millenium. Paul probably felt that a second covenant would be a perfect way to get rid of the annoying protocols and traditions, which the Pharisees and Saducees held on to so dearly and in one swoop he excommunicated it all as an old covenant.
Ron's Commentary: To say that the law of God's character was not to be implanted in the heart of man as the greatest good gift of Christ's Incarnation, is nothing short of pure blasphemy and denigration of everything Christ did for man. End note.
Yet chapter 31 of Jeremiah has profound implications. It describes a time when sin will be done away with forever! It describes a time when the mystery of God is revealed and everyone discovers who God really is. At that time all will become so familiar with who God is that no man will be able to teach another "Let me tell you about what God is like!" Let's read it:
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. (Jer 31:34 KJV)
In this passage God seems to complain that the people broke the first covenant, though He does not say that He would withdraw that covenant. But to remedy that, at a special time, in the future, He intends to make a covenant which people will not turn away from. To accomplish that He promises to place His law into the hearts of His people so they will no longer depart from Him! The evidence of that is not contained in the above text, but it is spoken of a little later in the next chapter.
And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me. (Jer 32:40 KJV)
Ron's Commentary: In every era of Christianity, God has had a faithful people who did not depart from Him. The ultimate fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:34, is when all those faithful are gathered together at glorification time. By Dennis Kean's estimation, the faithful will not obey and receive the law in their hearts until glorification or thereafter. And at the same time, he says that obedience is necessary for salvation and scorns what he calls "gracers" who believe that we are justified by faith alone without works. The Jews proved that self works avail nothing. Without Christ we can do nothing, so the works Dennis advocates must be self-works, which are nothing but filthy rags of self-righteousness. We need to overcome now and we cannot do so without God's enabling grace. End note.
A moment of honesty
What we need to do here is to be honest. I understand that it weights heavily on us to suspect that Paul may have made a mistake. But men make mistakes. God does not place His reputation in the hands of weak humans and expect others to embrace whatever a witness of truth may say as ultimately accurate. For that we have many witnesses and we need to consider all the testimonies together and extract the consistent parts. Even then there may be doubt, but in spite of all that there is great value in the testimony of the Gospels and the rest of the books of the disciples. We just need to understand the difference between testimony of man and words of the living almighty God.
Ron's Commentary: Ellen White said that there are Scriptures that "appear" to contradict, as do some of her writings, but that all pertinent evidence must be considered and interpreted so that nothing contradicts. Dennis does not follow that formula for knowing that one is not in error. God did not give us holy writ that we should wade through error. The Holy Spirit attended all who contributed to the Bible. The gifts of the Spirit to the true church have never ceased--even to this day. End note.
The Son of God knew the weight of His words when He replied to Lucifer " It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." This was an important lesson for all of us. The Savior wanted to make an impression on us and show us how to rely on God. The words, which proceed out of the mouth of God, are life to us. That insight and our personal honesty help us to understand that Jeremiah's prophecy is talking about a future time when the issue with sin will have been resolved.
Ron's Commentary: I would not dispute that the ultimate fulfillment of Jeremiah's prophecy applies to the world made new, but only those who appropriate God's law in the heart, via His indwelling spirit here and now, will inherit the new earth. End note.
As we study this closer, we find more evidence for that. The words " ...I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts..." sounds good to us, but sin on planet earth continues after Calvary. If Paul is right, then God's new covenant has failed, again and it took no time at all, this time! God seems to have expected that this new covenant will not be like the first one, "...they shall not depart from me..." but it turns out to be even worse. Men seem to have found new depths of depravity. Some say that this is only true of the unconverted, but let me ask you about you. How perfect is your life with God? Is it filled with moments exemplary of a life in whose heart the law of God is written? Is life in general so different from how life was before this New Covenant supposedly kicked in? If not, we need to reconsider if this is the right interpretation.
Ron's Commentary: It is a foolish moot point to say that sin continues after Calvary! Where does Scripture teach Universalism, whereby all men are saved?! Dennis operates from the foolish premise that if the law if put in the hearts of repentant men, that all men should have repented and received that law in the heart or the text applies to only when all men will, and that is not necessarily so. The text can refer to true believers before the end-time as the SDA Bible Commentary states:
The SDA Bible Commentary offers the following reasonable explanation:
"Shall teach no more.--The failure of God's servants in large part to instruct the people in the real knowledge of God, because of the perfunctory performance of the observances and ceremonies of the old covenant, was to be corrected by the intimate acquaintance and fellowship believers would have with their Lord through the faith stimulated by the new covenant (see John 6:45, 46; I Cor. 2:6-16; Col. 1:27, 28).
Jhn 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
Believers would have no need to instruct one another because they would have the Holy Spirit's presence to show them all things:
Jhn 14:26 But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
1Cor. 2:6-16 6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: 7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.
The Divine Nature of Christ's Holy Spirit was not proffered before the cross. That gift was to empower mankind to overcome as Christ overcame. To deny the success of that gift is to deny the entire efficacy of the Incarnation sacrifice. That is what Dennis Kean's teaching does! End note.
"Some argue that it is. They assert that today we live with a conscience, something that people did not have before Calvary. Such an assertion is absurd, for there is plenty of evidence that the feeling of guilt existed within all including Adam. Adam felt guilt and shame and we do not have any reason to believe that the people from the patriarchs and prophets time were exempted.
Ron's Commentary: The issue is not whether or not a "feeling of guilt" existed and still exists. The issue is whether or not the Divine Nature of Christ, His Holy Spirit life and soul of Christ can exist in our hearts as a proffered gift of the Incarnation, for the purpose of aiding man to overcome sin and return to the image of God as a requisite (condition) for being present when all the faithful are gathered together and there will be no further need of instruction of man by man. End note.
Furthermore, we have even greater difficulties to explain in this passage. " ... And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD..." How broad and inclusive is this knowledge of God? Does God mean all believers and unbelievers? Or does this just apply to those who already know God? Can you see the difficulty? No matter which way you put it, it does not make sense, unless it is understood as being the "end of sin" time. If this should refer to the time of Paul, it would abrogate the need for missionary work, for the disciples all taught people about God. Most people they met had no ideas about the great love of God, which was seen among so few of them. Even the Savior gave a commandment, which ran counter to this prophetic segment. He commissioned the disciples as follows:
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. (Mark 16:15 KJV)
The difficulty here is not that there is one inconsistency. As you can see, there is no consistency whatsoever in Paul's interpretation of Jeremiah 31:31-34, but Paul could not see that. Such a realization could only be possible centuries down the road. To validate this interpretation of Paul we must take into consideration what transpired afterward and history is very clear on this. Paul simply cannot be right in this interpretation.
Ron's Commentary: Notice that Dennis (above) ellipsed .......Jeremiah 31:33 from the issue:
Jer 31:33 But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Also, verse 33 could be a prelude to the finality of verse 34. But, at any rate, it is a denial of the efficacy of the gift of the Holy Spirit and the Divine Nature of Jesus Christ, to say that the law cannot be planted in our inward parts NOW.
2Pe 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
Can we escape the corruption that is in the world through lust without the spirit (character) of the law and the lawgiver in our inward parts? Not that I know of! But apparently, Dennis knows of some other non-Biblical way! So I maintain that Jeremiah 31:33, must be applicable since the cross, and now, as well as in the future. End note.
The Eternal Covenant
Yet all this analysis is not the greater part of the difficulty of Paul's explanation. The most significant problem is that the covenant with Israel is eternal! It is the same covenant given to Abraham.
O ye seed of Abraham his servant, ye children of Jacob his chosen. He is the LORD our God: his judgments are in all the earth. He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations. Which covenant he made with Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac; And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant: (Psa 105:6-10 KJV)
Yet, Paul perceives it as an old covenant ready to vanish.
In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. (Heb 8:13 KJV)
Could he be right about that? As I said earlier, God's everlasting covenant cannot be annulled. If it were, the Savior, the heart of the covenant itself, could no longer keep the promise of salvation. This may seem adequate to those who imagine that the covenant was designed to get a bunch of people to do sacrificial duties until the Savior comes along, but such was not the case. God gave a promise to uphold His side of this eternal covenant for all those who would embrace it. A covenant has a binding on both parties.
Ron's Commentary: There is no difficulty with Paul perceiving that an old covenant is ready to vanish. All Paul meant was that the school-teacher aspects of that Old Covenant were ready to vanish away, and they did! No problem except in the mind of Dennis Kean! End note.
Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David. (Isa 55:3 KJV)
For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant; Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off. (Isa 56:4-5 KJV)
The Son of God signed and sealed this covenant with His own blood. His name will be given to all those who overcome. It was not a covenant to practice sacrificial duties, as some would have it. It was a covenant for the salvation of humanity, which was inscribed in ceremony, as a reminder of the promise of salvation through the Savior.
Ron's Commentary: If Dennis is implying that there is some other covenant unto the eunuchs that keep His sabbaths, that is not the case. There is one Everlasting Covenant. End note.
Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he make it not to grow. (2 Sam 23:5 KJV)
He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name. (Psa 111:9 KJV)
In the covenant with Adam, Abraham and Israel, salvation was the promise. Salvation was God's part of the agreement. How could such a covenant with God's promise for salvation ever become old? Throughout time God refers to this covenant as everlasting.
Ron's Commentary: The Everlasting Covenant became old in that some of its initial aspects were fulfilled! The New Covenant was the antitypical Lamb crucified, rather than animal sacrifices which could not make the participant perfect. The antitypical Lamb was the better promise. End note.
And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth. (Gen 9:16 KJV)
And I will establish my covenant between me and thee [Abraham] and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. (Gen 17:7 KJV)
He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. (Gen 17:13 KJV)
Ron's Commentary: The Gentiles were not circumcised physically. True converts were circumcised of heart spiritually.
Act 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Rom 2:26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither [is that] circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Rom 2:29 But he [is] a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision [is that] of the heart, in the spirit, [and] not in the letter; whose praise [is] not of men, but of God.
Rom 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
Rom 3:30 Seeing [it is] one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. End note.
And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. (Gen 17:19 KJV)
Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed. (Exo 31:16-17 KJV)
Every sabbath he shall set it in order before the LORD continually, being taken from the children of Israel by an everlasting covenant. (Lev 24:8 KJV)
Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he make it not to grow. (2 Sam 23:5 KJV)
And hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant, (1 Chr 16:17 KJV)
And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant: (Psa 105:10 KJV)
He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name. (Psa 111:9 KJV)
The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. (Isa 24:5 KJV)
Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David. (Isa 55:3 KJV)
For I the LORD love judgment, I hate robbery for burnt offering; and I will direct their work in truth, and I will make an everlasting covenant with them. (Isa 61:8 KJV)
Nevertheless I will remember my covenant with thee in the days of thy youth, and I will establish unto thee an everlasting covenant. (Ezek 16:60 KJV)
O ye seed of Abraham his servant, ye children of Jacob his chosen. He is the LORD our God: his judgments are in all the earth. He hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations. Which covenant he made with Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac; And confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant: (Psa 105:6-10 KJV)
So, what is the second covenant about, then?
When the originator of sin is destroyed with all those who rebelled against God, the universe will go on, but it will no longer be the same that it once was. It will be a safer place. God intends to take advantage of the lessons that the universe has learned to make it a safer place than it could have been before. The reason sin was given time to flourish is that the universe needed to witness how detrimental sin is. Without that knowledge it could not be properly understood and the issue of sin would not be settled. A far more difficult or incurable infection could have followed. Should God have destroyed or isolated the sinner before the sinner had a chance to affect someone else, undue fear of God would supplant a loving response from the creatures. "Do what I say or die" does not provoke voluntary compliance like freedom and love. "Take my word for it" is not an easy consolation from the court, when our own child is condemned to destruction. Lucifer brought a shadow of doubt on God's name. In that way he secured himself plenty of time to reek havoc and further his selfish plans. But God considered Lucifer's ploy and devised a plan, not only to uproot Lucifer's influence, but also to permanently eradicate the possibility of another rebellion. There is something to be said about omniscience. His plan was a thorough plan to end the human affliction forever.
Many take refuge in the belief that God will somehow eradicate sin and make sure that it will never come up again. They cite verses like the following as evidence:
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. (Rev 21:4 KJV)
But how can that be guaranteed? Will free will be taken away? Is there a crystal ball that could guarantee that this would never recur? Others, who see a little deeper and do not embrace Christian beliefs entirely, object, "If this happened once it can happen again. God cannot cure this potential problem with sin, as long as free will is around. It is bound to resurface and the universe is bound to be plunged into this chaos from time to time." To this charge God chose to reply!
What do ye imagine against the LORD? he will make an utter end: affliction shall not rise up the second time. (Nahum 1:9 KJV)
God views that objection as an insult to His name. His profound care and deep insight into reality compels Him to answer this question preemptively for all the people who may wonder about this. With uncanny precision He replies to this charge and gives us the assurance that He has devised a solution for this problem.
But how will God secure the universe from ever experiencing something of this kind again? This is a painful reality to consider. It is so painful that many cringe to just hear the mention of such a possibility. In view of the unrelenting agony of this world the mere mention of this possibility is met with much disdain. Yet, it is an important enough issue, which God wanted to address. Why? It is exactly because it hurts so much that He wants His children to know of His plans in this regard. We could find out about these details in heaven, but that is not good enough. God plays with open cards, with His people.
Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets. (Amos 3:7 KJV)
Jeremiah, chapters 31 and 32 contain a prophecy, which clarifies how God will deal with sin, once Lucifer and his followers are destroyed. It will not be the same as it was in the past. A radical alteration will take place to prevent a recurrence of a wide spread rebellion. With the same words that Paul's quotation of Jeremiah is initiated, God expounds on His plans:
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast. And it shall come to pass, that like as I have watched over them, to pluck up, and to break down, and to throw down, and to destroy, and to afflict; so will I watch over them, to build, and to plant, saith the LORD. In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge. (Jer 31:27-30 KJV)
This is a radical departure from the "Happily ever after" scenario we all would like to believe about the future "post sin" time. In this exposition we realize how concerned God is about the future. His plans go a lot further than we previously may have imagined. While God says that wide spread rebellion will not rise again, He clearly is preparing for what to do if sin should come up again. The New Covenant is designed to deal with sin effectively and prevent a protracted investigation as in the case of Lucifer. Now that the universe has learned all it needs to learn about sin, sin can no longer hide behind "I have a better idea, let me show you". In this exposition we can also see that "freedom of will" will not be taken away, much to the dismay of the Calvinist element in Christianity. The abuse of that freedom, however, will not be dealt with, in the same fashion. No longer will God need to be patient to the point where sin is given the chance to infect others. The one who eats of it is the same one who suffers the consequences of sin. "every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge." The children will no longer bear the sins of the fathers nor will sin be given the opportunity to flourish. God goes on with the description of those days using the same refrain "Behold the days come":
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. (Jer 31:31-34 KJV)
Ron's Commentary: The New Covenant is new only in the context that the one made according to the covenant that he made with their fathers in the day that He took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, which covenant they broke, was BEFORE the better promises established by the death of the antitypical Lamb, Jesus Christ. Same covenant, better promises--exceeding great and precious promises, whereby the law in the heart would give victory over the corruption that is in the world through lust. Tell me that following PROMISE does not apply to now--in a world in which LUST EXISTS. Lust does not exist in the next world!
2Pe 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. End note.
Finally, the context of this passage of Scripture makes sense to us. Now we understand that it is a long-term plan. But God has more to say about it. As we read into this plan we begin to understand how thorough God's plans are. Nothing escapes Him. The minutest concern of His children is addressed. The enemy will be destroyed forever. And, there, God will make a memorial of His victory over sin. With the same refrain "Behold the days come..." He continues:
Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that the city shall be built to the LORD from the tower of Hananeel unto the gate of the corner. And the measuring line shall yet go forth over against it upon the hill Gareb, and shall compass about to Goath. And the whole valley of the dead bodies, and of the ashes, and all the fields unto the brook of Kidron, unto the corner of the horse gate toward the east, shall be holy unto the LORD; it shall not be plucked up, nor thrown down any more for ever. (Jer 31:38-40 KJV)
Looking at all the trouble, which came upon Israel, when Nebuchadnezzar came against Jerusalem, Jeremiah perceives God's distant future perspective and records His words.
Behold, I will gather them out of all countries, whither I have driven them in mine anger, and in my fury, and in great wrath; and I will bring them again unto this place, and I will cause them to dwell safely: And they shall be my people, and I will be their God: And I will give them one heart, and one way, that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them: And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me. Yea, I will rejoice over them to do them good, and I will plant them in this land assuredly with my whole heart and with my whole soul. For thus saith the LORD; Like as I have brought all this great evil upon this people, so will I bring upon them all the good that I have promised them. And fields shall be bought in this land, whereof ye say, It is desolate without man or beast; it is given into the hand of the Chaldeans. Men shall buy fields for money, and subscribe evidences, and seal them, and take witnesses in the land of Benjamin, and in the places about Jerusalem, and in the cities of Judah, and in the cities of the mountains, and in the cities of the valley, and in the cities of the south: for I will cause their captivity to return, saith the LORD. (Jer 32:37-44 KJV)
Ron's Commentary: God merely restates His ONE EVERLASTING COVENANT with the finally faithful of the Jews. That is all that is happening in the above quoted Scriptures. Everlasting Covenant is EVERLASTING, and there are not two everlasting covenants. The eyes of the Jews were blinded in part until the fullness of the Gentiles is fulfilled. The still want to re-build the Temple in Jerusalem and begin sacrificing again. They have all the materials in place to do just that. But all of them who will be saved must accept the sacrifice of Christ via the Sanctuary Service and the Old--New Covenant if they are saved. There are not two Sanctuary Services--one for Jews and one for Gentiles!
When Jews accept Christ, God will honor His ONE Everlasting Old--New Covenant with the Jews who finally turn to believe in Him. The honoring of the Everlasting Covenant with the Jews will be on the same basis as it is for the Gentiles--repentance, acceptance of, and obedience to the everlasting gospel. As superior and exclusive as some Jews like to regard themselves over and above Gentiles, God does not have one standard (Everlasting Covenant) for the Jews and another for the Gentiles, Dennis' false interpretations notwithstanding.
Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.
Luk 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. End note.
Dennis says:
"The critical thing we learn here is the timing of the New Covenant. The New Covenant is not going to take effect until the destruction of the wicked. In the meanwhile the Old Covenant is still a binding covenant for us today. It is not an Old Covenant. It has never been annulled. It cannot be annulled and it cannot grow old!
Ron's Commentary: Certain aspects of the Old Covenant certainly did wax old and were replaced by the New--Old Covenant. No one will be saved who does not enter into covenant relationship with Christ BEFORE probation closes. By New--Old, I mean the Old Covenant which became New when Christ died as the antitypical sacrificial Lamb. Only certain aspects of the Old Covenant waxed old, giving rise to new elements--thus it is termed the New Covenant, but it is really the Old Covenant updated. End note.
Dennis says:
"And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you. (Judg 2:1 KJV)
My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. (Psa 89:34 KJV)
God's Everlasting Covenant is so enduring that God views it as binding even in our day and age. He promises that He will never brake His covenant with the people and that extends it into the everlasting future. This is very important to remember. Nevertheless it is possible for men to break this covenant with God. That's strange! Let me explain. In Isaiah 24 the end of time is discussed and there, we read that the destruction of the world is coming because this so-called "Old Covenant" has been broken on the part of men! Men have defiled the earth with transgressions, and the focal point is the everlasting Covenant.
Behold, the LORD maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof. And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest; as with the servant, so with his master; as with the maid, so with her mistress; as with the buyer, so with the seller; as with the lender, so with the borrower; as with the taker of usury, so with the giver of usury to him. The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly spoiled: for the LORD hath spoken this word. The earth mourneth and fadeth away, the world languisheth and fadeth away, the haughty people of the earth do languish. The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. (Isa 24:1-5 KJV)
The everlasting Covenant in its essential form is the promise of forgiveness for all that repent. God's promise of salvation for the repentant can never be abrogated or annulled! God's commitment to mercy is not a temporary fix for the current rebellion crisis. This Covenant cannot grow old or run out. The Covenant with Israel is therefore not the Old, but rather the Everlasting Covenant made with all humanity and delivered allegorically to Israel.
Final Words (by Dennis)
"Many of us observe Christmas, Easter, and who knows what pagan holiday, but these are not a part of God's Everlasting Covenant with the spiritual Israelite. If we need special holidays and time to spend in memorial or educate our children in heavenly matters, what better way can there be than to embrace God's covenant with Israel? God has outlined and promised so many blessings for those who take hold of His covenant. Why not take him up on that? The Sabbath is a good start.
God speaks of a time when men will rediscover truths so long forgotten.
And they that shall be of thee shall build the old waste places: thou shalt raise up the foundations of many generations; and thou shalt be called, The repairer of the breach, The restorer of paths to dwell in. (Isa 58:12 KJV)
The Adventist truth is a candidate for this. We were given great light to restore and recover in.
Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.... (Jer 6:16 KJV)
The New Covenant as promoted by much of Christianity is not rightly understood. A single passage in Scriptures is used as evidence to promote an idea that simply cannot stand up to the test of the Scriptural standard. Sound beliefs are not supported by a single reference. Experienced students of truth recognize the need of multiple references to support a cornerstone belief.
Parting with the so-called "Old" Covenant as many other Christians do, our Adventist foundation is placed in jeopardy. The function of the Sanctuary becomes suspect if the old covenant has been ended and made irrelevant. But more than the Advent faith this negation erodes the very credibility of Christianity at large. By annulling the central promise of the everlasting Covenant, Christianity is emptied of its greatest value. Rather than shun, we need to seek out the meaning of this invaluable covenant.
The New Covenant, however, will be a reality far into the future, but until then and beyond, God's promise for the salvation of mankind will endure. God's Covenant with Israel is an everlasting promise for all people, which God intends to keep forever. It was signed with the blood of the Savior and confirmed as an everlasting promise of salvation.
END of Dennis Kean's Document.
Ron's Conclusions
Dennis says: And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. (Mark 10:18 KJV)
Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. (Mark 10:19 KJV)
There is no suggestion of any idea that Salvation is by faith alone, devoid of works. The Savior's parting words reaffirm this point with additional clarity:
And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. (Rev 22:12 KJV)
The purpose of a Witness
"There is no suggestion of any idea that Salvation is by faith alone, devoid of works. The Savior's parting words reaffirm this point with additional clarity:
And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. (Rev 22:12 KJV)
There is no suggestion of any idea that Salvation is by faith alone, devoid of works."
Ron responds: So Dennis Kean properly teaches works as a condition for justification, but he does not believe that the law is put in the hearts of man by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. That leaves one source of power for works wrought--self works, which are not acceptable to God because without Him we can do nothing, and our own works are as filthy rags unless they are motivated by faith in and love for Christ, at which time we receive Him into the heart and work under His inspiration and the proper motive of faith in and love for Christ. Even though Christ imparts the faith and empowerment to perform works, if we cooperate in performing them, He imputes them to us as righteousness, just as He did in the case of Abraham. Notice:
Jam 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
Abraham proved his faith by his works.
The only way any works count is if we have Jesus in the heart via His Divine Nature dwelling within. Works of our own will not earn salvation. The Jews proved that! Their entire history is lost on Dennis! Holy Spirit empowered works avail salvation. Dennis teaches works. So why does he then say that the New Covenant in the heart of man does not apply to NOW?
- Dennis Violates the following formula by which one may KNOW that he is not in error:
Weight of Evidence Formula: "1. Every word must have its proper bearing on the subject presented in the Bible 2. All Scripture is necessary, and may be understood by diligent application and study 3. Nothing revealed in Scripture can or will be hid from those who ask in faith, not wavering 4. To understand doctrine, bring all the scriptures together on the subject you wish to know, then let every word have its proper influence and if you can form your theory without a contradiction, you cannot be in error 5. Scripture must be its own expositor, [interpreter] since it is a rule of itself. If I depend on a teacher to expound to me, and he should guess at its meaning, or desire to have it so on account of his sectarian creed, or to be thought wise, then his guessing, desire, creed, or wisdom is my rule, and not the Bible." E.G. White, Second Advent Review and Herald, 11-25-34, pr. 24.
- Rather than interpreting so that nothing contradicts WITHOUT MAKING SCRIPTURE CONTRADICT ITSELF, Dennis says that Paul errs and contradicts himself.
Dennis Kean violates the above weight of evidence instruction in the following ways. He says Paul is errant for saying:
- "As Paul intimates, the Old Covenant was not good enough "For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second." (Heb 8:7 KJV). God, consequently, brought in a new and better covenant and sealed it with the blood of His beloved Son. Under this New Covenant, however, not all things were the same. What was changed from the Old Covenant and what was not changed has been under intense debate."
Ron's Commentary: There is no need for debate as to what was changed from the Old Covenant. The Bible explicitly explains what was changed and nailed to the cross. End note.
- Dennis further indicts Paul:
"God is not man and God does not contradict Himself. Paul, however, contradicted James and Peter and had theological differences with most of the disciples. Paul would say:
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (Rom 3:28 KJV)
While James, upon hearing such comments would come back with:
Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? (James 2:17-21 KJV)
But Paul counters:
Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. (Rom 4:9 KJV)
Yet, the Savior speaks like James. When asked directly on how salvation is obtained, He replied with clarity:
And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? (Mark 10:17 KJV)
And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. (Mark 10:18 KJV)
Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. (Mark 10:19 KJV)
There is no suggestion of any idea that Salvation is by faith alone, devoid of works. The Savior's parting words reaffirm this point with additional clarity:
And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." (Rev 22:12 KJV)
Dennis says: " They assert that in the New Covenant, the Law is written right into the heart of the believer. This plays a major role in the moderate's perspective, though in reality it seems to make little impact, if any, on the average life of a believer. Man was a sinner before Calvary and it may very well be that he is an even greater sinner today. So how did it make a difference when God decided to "write them in their hearts"? What advantage was there to the New Covenant?"
Here Dennis assaults the efficacy of the grace gift of Holy Spirit's power of the Divine Nature of Christ in the heart--to effect a change in the heart of man. This gift was a result of Christ's Incarnation. If Christ dwells within as He deigns, and the law is a transcript of His character, then the law is planted in our hearts when Christ indwells us.
Dennis questions whether man can be righteous NOW by having the law planted in the heart NOW, by partaking of the Divine Nature of Christ. But note the following verse and then look up all the references to righteous men in Scripture.
1Pe 3:12 For the eyes of the Lord [are] over the righteous, and his ears [are open] unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord [is] against them that do evil.
Jhn 14:17 [Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
Rom 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
1Cr 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
Is it not odd that according to Dennis Kean, Christ cannot plant His law in us when He dwelleth in us by His Spirit--when His law is a transcript of His character. We can partake of His Divine Nature, His Holy Spirit, but somehow, according to Dennis and ilk, Christ's law cannot be planted in our hearts until glorification of thereafter! If Christ is in us, the hope of glory, and if His law is a transcript of His character, then His law is planted in our hearts when we receive Christ in the born again experience.
God bless,
Ron Beaulieu
|