Looking through a volume of not-forgotten lore, I came across an old quote... not sure whom it is from... about the curious strain we sometimes see applied to the definitions of Old and New Testaments. What do you think of it? The historical covenants given by God may best be understood not as 1) successive models discarded when the newer model comes out, or 2) good ideas gone bad because of runaway man foiling the plans of a frantic and desperate God--- but, rather.... as layers of preparation and stages of development, God reaching down daily and nightly, constantly, to prepare for the day in which he would come down. Does the bud of the flower become discarded when the flower blooms, or does it not rather become subsumed into the ultimate outcome, the flower. The truth and validity of what many call the Old Covenant was not an ultimate truth, but a penultimate truth... and the penultimate truth is only true because the ultimate is true. Hebrews 9: 11But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; 12and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. 13For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh, 14how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
Posted on: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:33:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015