Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

[Jesuslovesus]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

There actually is a Thread right now in Contro where they are debating something similar to this topic, the second you made clear your personal beliefs on the incarnation to me it became apparent we would find no agreement on this topic, if you agree with the hypostatic union and the Athanasian Creed, then my position would make sense, if you don't that's fine, I'm not here to call others views unbiblical or heretical. Believe what you want. But I would prefer not to debate it here if you don't mind.

[Noeb]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

I did not he was just a man, I said,
"God became a man who was given the Spirit w/o measure."
What is not true about that statement?

That's supposed to say
"I did not say he was just a man"

[Noeb]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

So how is this not a denial of the Hypostatic Union? As you said once more clearly you do not believe Jesus was 100% God.

Athanasian Creed - "He is God from the essence of the Father, begotten before time; and he is human from the essence of his mother, born in time; completely God, completely human, with a rational soul and human flesh; equal to the Father as regards divinity, less than the Father as regards humanity. Although he is God and human, yet Christ is not two, but one. He is one, however, not by his divinity being turned into flesh, but by God's taking humanity to himself. He is one, certainly not by the blending of his essence, but by the unity of his person. For just as one human is both rational soul and flesh, so too the one Christ is both God and human."

The creed doesn't say he was 100% God. Despite what you may think, complete doesn't imply 100%. Because he was a defender of Nicene theology during the Church's apostasy that's probably his intent but it's wrong. Jesus could be God, complete as intended for the task, but not Spirit only, with his presence killing flesh. That's extreme just to get the point across. So if by, I deny the Hypostatic Union, you mean I deny what defender of Nicene theology believed then yes, I do. This has been explained before. My user name is Noeb which stands for No_Eternally_Begotten. I believe he was God as intended-
from the essence of the Father
from the essence of his mother
with a rational soul and human flesh
equal to the Father as regards divinity, less than the Father as regards humanity
not two, as most (and you) believe, but one

It also says he was equal to the Father. You do not. You won't address this error in your theology. I do not base my theology on Nicene theology. I base it on scripture. What say you?

[Noeb]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

I believe He wasn't always flesh and bone.

So? We're talking about what he is, not what he was.

Once more you believe the role of Mediator Does end? Correct?

Possibly. Not sure, because, what about the mortals that survive the second coming and their children? I've been going with it ending for your sake and the sake of argument. In that case, yes, the role ends but the title/position does not.

I never claimed Jesus wasn't high priest forever I already claimed the opposite.

The high priest of the NC is the mediator so? He entered with his own blood as the sacrifice. He did not use an animal. Why don't you see this?

[Jesuslovesus]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Athanasian Creed - "He is God from the essence of the Father, begotten before time; and he is human from the essence of his mother, born in time; completely God, completely human, with a rational soul and human flesh; equal to the Father as regards divinity, less than the Father as regards humanity. Although he is God and human, yet Christ is not two, but one. He is one, however, not by his divinity being turned into flesh, but by God's taking humanity to himself. He is one, certainly not by the blending of his essence, but by the unity of his person. For just as one human is both rational soul and flesh, so too the one Christ is both God and human."

The creed doesn't say he was 100% God. Despite what you may think, complete doesn't imply 100%. Because he was a defender of Nicene theology during the Church's apostasy that's probably his intent but it's wrong. Jesus could be God, complete as intended for the task, but not Spirit only, with his presence killing flesh. That's extreme just to get the point across. So if by, I deny the Hypostatic Union, you mean I deny what defender of Nicene theology believed then yes, I do. This has been explained before. My user name is Noeb which stands for No_Eternally_Begotten. I believe he was God as intended-
from the essence of the Father
from the essence of his mother
with a rational soul and human flesh
equal to the Father as regards divinity, less than the Father as regards humanity
not two, as most (and you) believe, but one

It also says he was equal to the Father. You do not. You won't address this error in your theology. I do not base my theology on Nicene theology. I base it on scripture. What say you?

It says he Is equal to the Father in regards to Divinity, Less the the father in regards to HUMANITY. SO if his Humanity was Gone would he be less the the father? I'd say no, but I also say I'd prefer not to have this debate here.

[Jesuslovesus]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

So? We're talking about what he is, not what he was.

No that's what you're talking about, I'm talking about what he will be AT the End After he Defeats death and Hands the Kingdom Back to the father.

Possibly. Not sure, because, what about the mortals that survive the second coming and their children? I've been going with it ending for your sake and the sake of argument. In that case, yes, the role ends but the title/position does not.

Still seems like we're talking about two completly different times, this event is post second coming and their children.

The high priest of the NC is the mediator so? He entered with his own blood as the sacrifice. He did not use an animal. Why don't you see this?

I see it.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

I already sent you the passage man that establishs what I and others are trying to say. Before the Incarnation as the Son Jesus was Equal with God.

Philippians 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,b 7but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant,c being born in the likeness of men. 8And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Jesus did this to become the Mediator so that He could Rule on Earth as a MAN.

After he's done ruling on Earth 1 Corthians 15:24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For “God[c] has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.

Simple he Started off As Equal with God, and after his Duty (as the Son & Mediator) is complete he shall return to being Equal with God.

My eyes on the ball. Disagree all you want Just don't claim no passage establishs the doctrine that the role of Mediator ends i'm saying it's right there written in black and white.

Phil 2:5-11 is not saying that Jesus will rule as a Man on earth.

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is

Jesus will be in his spiritual form since the saints would have received immortality and be also in spiritual bodies. There is nothing that suggests that Jesus will change his form after he has delivered the kingdom to God the Father. Even though 1 Cor 15:24-28 confirms that Jesus handed over the kingdom to God, it doesn't explicitly say that Jesus ceases to be a Mediator. The same way that Jesus continues to be our Eternal High Priest.

Your claim that it is "written in black and white" in the cited scriptures is not true - just your unfounded assumptions.

[Jesuslovesus]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

Phil 2:5-11 is not saying that Jesus will rule as a Man on earth.

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is

Jesus will be in his spiritual form since the saints would have received immortality and be also in spiritual bodies. There is nothing that suggests that Jesus will change his form after he has delivered the kingdom to God the Father. Even though 1 Cor 15:24-28 confirms that Jesus handed over the kingdom to God, it doesn't explicitly say that Jesus ceases to be a Mediator. The same way that Jesus continues to be our Eternal High Priest.

Your claim that it is "written in black and white" in the cited scriptures is not true - just your unfounded assumptions.

I don't know what you believe his "spiritual form" is but to me its still the form of a Man. Anyways thats all i will say on this subject.

Phil 2:5-11 is not saying that Jesus will rule as a Man on earth.

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is

Jesus will be in his spiritual form since the saints would have received immortality and be also in spiritual bodies. There is nothing that suggests that Jesus will change his form after he has delivered the kingdom to God the Father. Even though 1 Cor 15:24-28 confirms that Jesus handed over the kingdom to God, it doesn't explicitly say that Jesus ceases to be a Mediator. The same way that Jesus continues to be our Eternal High Priest.

Your claim that it is "written in black and white" in the cited scriptures is not true - just your unfounded assumptions.

I don't know what you believe his "spiritual form" is but to me its still the form of a Man. Anyways thats all i will say on this subject.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

I don't know what you believe his "spiritual form" is but to me its still the form of a Man. Anyways thats all i will say on this subject.

At least, according to 1 John 3:2 we will see his face...

I don't know what you believe his "spiritual form" is but to me its still the form of a Man. Anyways thats all i will say on this subject.

At least, according to 1 John 3:2 we will see his face...

[Doug Brents]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

This was an ongoing discussion but was unfortunately deleted during the recent glitch, hence my quest to reignite the discourse. Jeremiah 31:31-35 had prophesied that a new covenant will replace the old and this was fulfilled by Jesus death on the cross (Heb 10:20). Further support can also be found in numerous passages in Hebrews.

Hebrews 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, 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.

There are, however, those who hold contrary views; these handfuls argue that the new covenant will come into effect when Jesus returns.

What's your thought on the subject?

I have not taken the time to read the 75 pages worth of discussion because the last few posts (that I did read) seem far afield from the question at hand. The passage in Galatians 4:21-31 seems to put the controversy to bed very nicely.

21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23 His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.

24 These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27 For it is written:

“Be glad, barren woman,
you who never bore a child;
shout for joy and cry aloud,
you who were never in labor;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband.”[e]

28 Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29 At that time the son born according to the flesh persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30 But what does Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”[f] 31 Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

Here Paul, speaking to the mostly Gentile congregation of believers in Galatia tells them that they are NOW currently under the NEW covenant. The Jews who refused to believe in Jesus were the children of the slave woman (The Law), but the believers in Galatia were, as are we, children of promise, and are under the New Covenant.

Again, Hebrews 8:6 says: "But in fact the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, since the new covenant is established on better promises."

Notice that Jesus is the mediator of a covenant which "IS" superior, not "will be...". Again, the New Covenant is in effect NOW in Paul's time.


There are numerous other passages, but these give us clear indication that the New Covenant was in effect in the First Century, the Apostles taught that is was so through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and there is really no room for debate today. I believe that the New Covenant went into effect no later than the resurrection of Jesus (potentially at the time of His death). Some might argue that it didn't begin until Pentecost. That is an academic debate at this point because it most certainly was in effect during the First Century when Paul wrote Galatians, and is therefore most definitely in effect today.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

We've been disagreeing on everything. There's no way to read God all in all in the midst of a resurrection context and conclude it means Jesus is going to stop being a man. Why is God the Son forever a bad thing?

I see nothing wrong with that concept.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

That's exactly what I Did and I'm not the only one, so if you don't agree like you said we don't agree on much so it's fine if you don't believe it or we don't agree on this. The fact is I can interpret the phrase (the God may be All in All) to mean that God will return to how he was before the reincarnation of the Son Jesus as soon as the purpose of the son is completed.

Therein lies the problem, Jesus Christ' position as Son of God is eternal and will never end. A son never ceases to be anything, but a son to his father.

[Trivalee]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

I already sent you the passage man that establishs what I and others are trying to say. Before the Incarnation as the Son Jesus was Equal with God.

Philippians 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,b 7but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant,c being born in the likeness of men. 8And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Jesus did this to become the Mediator so that He could Rule on Earth as a MAN.

After he's done ruling on Earth 1 Corthians 15:24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For “God[c] has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.

Simple he Started off As Equal with God, and after his Duty (as the Son & Mediator) is complete he shall return to being Equal with God.

My eyes on the ball. Disagree all you want Just don't claim no passage establishs the doctrine that the role of Mediator ends i'm saying it's right there written in black and white.

Our God is Triune in nature, i.e. they are in essence equal. However, problems arise when we start to profile and categorize them (the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit) in order of importance.

[percho]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

For finding fault, He saith to them, 'Lo, days come (present), saith the Lord, and I will complete (vi Fut Act 1 Sg) with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, a new covenant,

That first, in bold is not found in in Jeremiah 31. And after the past and present of HP, ministry, mediator, and better promises, the NC is still future. From Heb 8:1-8

That in bold is in the present, of the newly sanctioned better promises by the resurrection of Christ, made High Priest after the order of Melchisedek, by, He who spake unto him: 'My Son thou art, I to-day have begotten thee;' by which the man Jesus becomes, mediator of the still future New Covenant.

For finding fault, He saith to them, 'Lo, days come (present), saith the Lord, and I will complete (vi Fut Act 1 Sg) with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, a new covenant,

That first, in bold is not found in in Jeremiah 31. And after the past and present of HP, ministry, mediator, and better promises, the NC is still future. From Heb 8:1-8

That in bold is in the present, of the newly sanctioned better promises by the resurrection of Christ, made High Priest after the order of Melchisedek, by, He who spake unto him: 'My Son thou art, I to-day have begotten thee;' by which the man Jesus becomes, mediator of the still future New Covenant.

[ewq1938]

Re: Has the New Covenant started or is it still in the future?

by which the man Jesus becomes, mediator of the still future New Covenant.

The New covenant has been active since the cross. There are no other future covenants mentioned in scripture. If you aren't a part of the new covenant now, then you are without a covenant which is a dangerous thing.

by which the man Jesus becomes, mediator of the still future New Covenant.

The New covenant has been active since the cross. There are no other future covenants mentioned in scripture. If you aren't a part of the new covenant now, then you are without a covenant which is a dangerous thing.