From: jsast@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Jonathan S. Anderson)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: The New Convenant (was Re: Am I a Christian?)
Date: 8 Apr 92 20:12:30 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <22583@goofy.Apple.COM> ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik) writes:
>
>In other words (deleting the twisted meanings in the sentences below) he
>does not throw out the law of the Old Testament as a useless doctrine. I.e. this
>is what we have talked about all the time, Paul is the person who created
>the concept of the new Covenant, not Jesus. It would also imply that
>*real* Christians should follow the laws of the Old Testament. And 
>'real' Christians don't do this.
>
>Cheers,
>Kent

I'm not sure if I agree with the contention that Paul was the one who
invented the idea of the New Covenant.  Look at the words of our Lord's
Supper, 

	"This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out
	for you."  Luke 22:21 NIV

In all fairness, however, I should say that neither Matthew nor Mark mention
the word "new" in their accounts.  John's account says nothing about the
bread and the wine, but a new convenant is not mentioned there either.
In Matthew and Mark, Jesus calls his cup the "blood of the covenant".  Did
Luke just decide to add the word "new" as a result of Paul's or other's
teachings or did he do it because it is what Christ actually said?

	I don't think it is fair to put the new covenant idea squarely on
Paul's shoulders, however.  Jeremiah strictly says, 
	
	"The time is coming," declares the Lord, "when I will make a 
	new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of
	Judah.  It will not be like the covenant I made with their
	forefathers when I took them by the hand out of Egypt,
	because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them."
					-Jeremiah 31:31-32 NIV

If we accept that Jesus was the Messiah, it doesn't take a great leap of
faith to say that he would be the one God would choose to institute what
he was talking about through Jeremiah.  Paul, knowing the scriptures and
prophets rather well, would probably be the most logical apostle to expound
on this idea and connect it to Christ.  This he obviously did.

Now the question becomes, "Did Christ disallow any of the 613 Levitical
laws with the institution of the new covenant."  Christ himself said that
he didn't, but he also clearly shows that the law could not be followed by
any mortal.  (Other than himself)  If this is the case, it is in direct
agreement with the passage from Jeremiah.  It would also explain "writing
the law on their hearts".  In other words, the law is an absolute, but being
imperfect beings we cannot see that.  Therefore, if we look on the law as
an absolute we may be in danger of breaking it because we haven't considered
all the applicable situations.  (Nor can we do so)  

-Jon Anderson


  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  ><>  
  Jon Anderson                                      jsast@unix.cis.pitt.edu
      "Won't you look down upon me Jesus, you gotta help me make a stand,
       You've just got to see me through another day.
       My body's aching and my time is at hand,
       And I won't make it any other way. "                 -James Taylor
  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  <><  
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc