God the Father made a different promise to Christ than God made to the fathers

I Peter 1: 18 For you know that you were redeemed from your empty way of life inherited from THE FATHERS, not with perishable things like silver or gold, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without defect or blemish. 20 Christ was chosen before the creation of the world but was revealed at the end of the ages

Even if God had chosen to save each and every human sinner by Christ’s death, it would still not have been foolish for God to create humans (and the world) in order that Christ would become incarnate and die for humans that God created to be sinners.

Fathers Abraham and David are NOT in heaven because they are still dead right now.

Acts 13: 32 And we ourselves proclaim to you the good news of the promise that was made to our FATHERS. 33 God has fulfilled this for us, their children, by raising up Jesus, as it is written in the second Psalm:
You are My Son;
today I have BECOME Your Father.
34 Since God the Father raised the Son from the dead, never to return to decay, God the Father has spoken in this way, I will grant you the faithful covenant blessings made to DAVID 36 David fell asleep, was buried with his fathers, and decayed. 37 But the One God raised up did not decay.

God the Father elects some sinners in Christ because of the Father’s love for Christ. God the Father elects some sinners in Christ because of the Father’s love for those sinners.

The death of Christ is not the cause of God’s election in love.
God’s election in love is the cause of the death of Christ.

God’s justice in Christ’s death is NOT the cause of God’s love, but God’s justice in Christ’s death is the necessary means of God’s love.
Justification is not election, but trying to teach imputation without election is failing to teach the justice of Christ’s death for imputed sins.

Christ’s election obligates Christ to die under God’s law.

Isaiah 53:10
Yet the Lord was pleased to crush the Servant severely.
You make Him a restitution offering,
The servant will see His seed, He will prolong His days,
and by His hand, the Lord’s pleasure will be accomplished.
11 The servant will see the accomplishment out of His anguish,
and He will be satisfied with His knowledge.
My righteous Servant will justify many,
and He will carry their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will GIVE HIM THE MANY as a portion, and He will receive the mighty as spoil,
BECAUSE He submitted Himself to DEATH,
and was counted among His sinners
He bore the sin of many
and interceded for His sinners

Did God create time? Or did God always have time?

Did God create His sovereignty ? Or did God always have sovereignty?

Before the ages when God elected Christ and Christ’s people, hadn’t that election already happened always before?

God made more than one promise to Abraham.
God promised Abraham that Abraham would have many children.
God promised land to Abraham and his children

Genesis 13: 15 for I will give you and your offspring all the land that you see for this lasting age

Genesis 17:8 And to you and your future offspring I will give the land where you are residing—all the land of Canaan—as a lasting possession, and I will be their God.”

Genesis 17: 19 But God said, “ Your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will name him ISSAC I will confirm My covenant with ISAAC as an lasting covenant for his future offspring.

Genesis 17: 20 As for Ishmael, I will certainly bless him; I will make him fruitful and will multiply him greatly. Ishmael will father tribal leaders, and I will make Ishmael into a great nation.

Genesis 22:17 I will indeed bless you (Abraham) and make your offspring as numerous as the stars of the sky and the sand on the seashore. Your offspring will possess the gates of their enemies. 18 And all the nations of the earth will be blessed by your offspring because you (Abraham) have obeyed My command.”

Since the apostle Paul took Scriptures with plural “seed” to mean the singular, can’t we also translate the many seed into one seed?

Galatians 3:8 Now the Scripture saw in advance that God would justify the Gentiles by faith and told the good news ahead of time to Abraham, saying, All the nations will be blessed through you.

Galatians 3:16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed.

Galatians 3:18 For if the inheritance is from the law, the inheritance is no longer from the promise. But God granted the inheritance TO ABRAHAM through the promise.

Galatians 3: 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise.

Even the apostle Paul knew that “seed” was the plural collective.

Ephesians 1:4-5. 4 For God chose us in Christ, before the creation of the world, to be holy and blameless in His sight. In love 5 God predestined us TO BE ADOPTED through Jesus Christ for Himself, according to His favor and will, 6 to the praise of His glorious grace that God favored us with in Christ.

God the Father elects some sinners in Christ because of the Father’s love for Christ. God the Father elects some sinners in Christ because of the Father’s love for these sinners.

was the promise of the new covenant made to both Christ and Christ’s elect?

https://bible.org/article/plain-senses-scripture-questioning-interpretive-singularity-galatians-3-and-romans-4

Psalm 72:17
May his name endure forever;
as long as the sun shines,
may his fame increase.
May all nations be blessed by him
and call him blessed.

Genesis 3: 15 Then the Lord God said
I will put hostility between you and the woman,
and between your seed and her seed.
He will strike your head,
and you will strike his heel.

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: election

Tags: , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

17 Comments on “God the Father made a different promise to Christ than God made to the fathers”

  1. markmcculley Says:

    https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2015/09/30/additional-answers-to-founders-conference-qa/

    In Gen 15, God is not promising to Abraham the blessings of the New Covenant: forgiveness of sins, regeneration, etc. He is swearing to fulfill what was promised to Abraham: that he will have numerous descendants, that they will inhabit the land of Canaan, and that in him all nations of the earth would be blessed. This last promise can be seen as a promise that Christ will come and establish the New Covenant to grant forgiveness of sins, etc. Thus we can say that the Abrahamic Covenant promises the future establishment of the New Covenant. It is not itself the New Covenant.

    Abraham was justified when he believed this promise, as it was a promise of Christ. But Abraham was not justified by the Abrahamic Covenant. As Owen notes “When God renewed the promise of the New Covenant unto Abraham, he is said to make a covenant with him; and he did so, but it was with respect unto other things, especially the proceeding of the promised Seed from his loins.”

    God does not say this promise will be received through faith alone apart from works.

    In fact, God specifically says that work was required to bring about the fulfillment (Gen 17:2, 9-14; 22:16-18; cf Gal 5:3; Acts 15:10). As John Murray states “The obedience of Abraham is represented as the condition upon which the fulfilment of the promise given to him was contingent and the obedience of Abraham’s seed is represented as the means through which the promise given to Abraham would be accomplished. There is undoubtedly the fulfilment of certain conditions… At the outset we must remember that the idea of conditional fulfilment is not something peculiar to the Mosaic covenant. We have been faced quite poignantly with this very question in connection with the Abrahamic covenant. And since this feature is there patent, it does not of itself provide us with any reason for construing the Mosaic covenant in terms different from those of the Abrahamic.” And the Mosaic is of works (Lev 18:5; Gal 3:12; Rom 10:5).

    Meredith Kline notes “How Abraham’s obedience related to the securing of the kingdom blessings in their old covenant form is a special question within the broad topic of the role of human works under redemptive covenant… His faithful performance of his covenantal duty is here clearly declared to sustain a causal relationship to the blessing of Isaac and Israel. It had a meritorious character that procured a reward enjoyed by others… Because of Abraham’s obedience redemptive history would take the shape of an Abrahamite kingdom of God from which salvation’s blessings would rise up and flow out to the nations. God was pleased to constitute Abraham’s exemplary works as the meritorious ground for granting to Israel after the flesh the distinctive role of being formed as the typological kingdom, the matrix from which Christ should come… The obedient Abraham, the faithful covenant servant, was a type of the Servant of the Lord in his obedience.”

    Nehemiah Coxe — “It is noteworthy that in this transaction of God with Abraham we first meet with an express injunction of obedience to a command (and that of positive right) as the condition of covenant interest. It is all ushered in with this prologue (Genesis 17:1), “I am the Almighty God; walk before me and be perfect.” A strict and entire obedience to his precepts is required in order to inherit the good things that were to be given by this covenant. In this mode of transacting it, the Lord was pleased to draw the first lines of that form of covenant relationship in which the natural seed of Abraham was fully stated by the law of Moses, which was a covenant of works with its terms, “Do this and live.”” p. 91

    Gen 15 is properly part of the Old Covenant, which includes the promise that Christ will come from Abraham (Rom. 9:5).

    https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2010/03/06/is-the-abrahamic-covenant-conditional-or-unconditional/

  2. markmcculley Says:

    Brandon Adams—When God says he will establish His covenant with Isaac instead of Ishmael, God is not commenting one way or the other on Ishmael’s salvation. He is simply saying that the Messiah will be born through the line of Isaac,

    PRCA commentator Robert C. Harbach—Scripture teaches that God’s goodness is always particular, and that this being true, we may not make the false distinction that some blessings are temporal and for all, while others are eternal and only for the elect. That distinction does not hold… Ishmael is not, therefore, excluded from the covenant and its blessings: but he is not the transmitter of the seed through whom Christ would come.

    Brandon Adams—When God says He will establish His covenant with Isaac instead of Ishmael, God is not commenting on the salvation of either because God is talking about the covenant of circumcision. Paul uses the example of God sovereignly choosing through whom the promised seed will come in the covenant of circumcision and applies it to the question of individual salvation.
    This interpretation has the added benefit of answering Arminians who argue that the Old Testament contexts of the election quotes Paul uses refer to “election to service” rather than individual salvation.

  3. markmcculley Says:

    Renihan–Paul treats God’s dealings with Abraham the same way by calling believers the children of Abraham and finding a greater meaning in the word “offspring” as relating to Christ rather than simply Abraham’s posterity (Galatians 3:7, 9, 16, 27-29). It is not ONE OR THE OTHER, as though promises were made only to Abraham and his natural children or to Christ and his offspring (Abraham included). It is both, each with its particular but related meaning in a typical or antitypical context. And thus the kingdom and covenants of Israel were not the kingdom and covenant of Christ though they were driving towards his birth and revealing truths about him all along the way. Old Testament saints were saved by the promise of one who was to come, and the covenant that he would establish. Consequently baptists do not use the kingdom of Israel and its covenants as the pattern for churches….

    Looking to the parent-child relationship is a misdirected attempt to understand covenantal membership. Redirecting our attention to federal headship brings clarity …. We blame Adam, not our parents, for the curse. The Israelites looked to Abraham, not their parents, for a claim to Canaan and its blessings, and to the conduct of the king, not their parents, for tenure in the land. So also, children must look to Christ, not their parents, for a claim to his covenant….We are born under Adam’s federal headship, and no one escapes the domain of darkness until God transfers them “to the kingdom of the beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins” (Colossians 1:12-14).

    http://www.placefortruth.org/placefortruth/article/the-case-for-credobaptism

  4. markmcculley Says:

    Matthew 10:35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.

    Matthew 10:37 Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

    Matthew 19:29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold and will inherit lasting life.

    But you will not back a father…

    Matthew 23: 9 Do not call anyone on earth your father, because you have one Father, who is in heaven.

    Luke 14:26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.

    Many paedobaptists don’t want to talk about the conditional or political aspects of the Abrahamic covenant. It’s as if those negative sactions were only in the Mosaic covenant. They don’t want to talk about the land, or about the second and third generations, or about holy wars. They want to read the Abrahamic covenant as if it were the new. But they do want to talk about ‘family structure’” Since there are no New Testament rules for infant initiation into a visible congregation, they want to reach back into the Old Testament (ignoring the intrusions) and find an adminstration for a new covenant church.

    A paedobaptist asks: What does it mean to be inheritors of a covenant that has passed away? I might as well sell you my title to the throne of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

    What does it mean to be a “child of the promise” today? it means being a Christian, not excluded from the covenants of grace, being included forever in the new covenant?

    What does it mean to be a biological child of a Christian today? It means you most likely are going to hear the gospel more than other people who don’t have Christian parents. But there is no way we should be taking promises to Abraham about his having many biological children and then one day the one seed being born, and apply those promises to ourselves. I know you can say that “every promise in the book is mine” but you are wrong if you say that. The gospel is only good news for the elect. The new covenant is only for the elect. And we need to tell our children that they can’t know if they are elect until and unless they believe the gospel.

    Look above to Romans 9, or look to Galatians 3-4. The texts say that there are two kinds of Israel, two kinds of seed. But some paeodbaptists say there was never really but one Israel.

    I am interested in hearing more about “covenantal efficacy”. If some folks without such diapers believe the gospel (even some who were not born to paedobaptist parents), then what is the efficacy of those “covenantal diapers”? If they don’t cause the faith, what is the efficacy which kicks in?

    Saying that your children are born Christians doesn’t change either their guilt or their corruption. . Nobody begins life justified and then loses salvation.

    Abraham is a father in more than one way. We can agree that the more important way Abraham is father is not at all about genetics (except that Jesus is genetically the seed of Abraham), without denying that Abraham was also father to Ishmael and other children of the slave woman.

    After Abraham believed the gospel, he was circumcised. Romans 4 makes much of the sequence. But some paedobaptists want infants to be outwardly given the sign of a covenant (like they were during the Abrahamic covenant), and then explain to them if they “break the covenant” that they were never “really in” (thus you never really broke).

    In the new covenant, it’s perfectly fine for a Christian to be single and not even have a biological family.

  5. markmcculley Says:

    P1 God promises to save the elect children born of Christian parents.
    P2 God promises to save the elect children not born of Christian parents
    (John 1:13; Gal 3:7-9; Rom 9:7-8, 11, 24-26; 10:11-13; 11:17; Eph 1:4-10,)
    C1 Physical heritage is irrelevant to God’s promise to save the elect.
    P3 Physical heritage is irrelevant to God’s promise to save the elect.
    P4 God’s covenantal faithfulness is determined by His promise to save the elect.
    C2 Physical heritage is irrelevant to God’s covenantal faithfulness. Brandon Adams, they are equivocating on what the promise is, precisely. Is it to the elect, or is it to all our children generally?
    P4 God’s covenantal faithfulness is determined by His promise to save those who he has promised to save.
    P5 God has promised to (among others) save the children of believers.
    C God shows His faithfulness (among other ways) when He saves (among others) the children of believers.
    In which case, there is nothing unique about the salvation of the children of believers since God’s faithfulness is also demonstrated (“among other ways”) when he saves the children of non-believers

    https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2015/02/24/gods-covenant-unfaithfulness/

  6. markmcculley Says:

    Leviticus 24:8 (King James Version)
    Every sabbath he shall set it in order before the Lord continually, being taken from the children of Israel by an eternal covenant.

    Exodus 40:15 (King James Version)
    15 And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest’s office: for their anointing shall surely be an eternal priesthood throughout their generations.

    Jonah 2 (King James Version)– Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish’s belly,2 And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heard my voice.
    3 For thou hadst cast me into the deep, in the midst of the seas; and the floods compassed me about: all thy billows and thy waves passed over me.
    4 Then I said, I am cast out of thy sight; yet I will look again toward thy holy temple.
    5 The waters compassed me about, even to the soul: the depth closed me round about for ever

    http://majorwithers.blogspot.com/2009/06/time-and-eternity.html

  7. markmcculley Says:

    Exodus 12:17 “You are to observe the Festival of Unleavened Bread because on this very day I brought your divisions out of the land of Egypt. You must observe this day throughout your generations as an eternal statute.

    Exodus 27:21 In the tent of meeting outside the veil that is in front of the testimony, Aaron and his sons are to tend the lamp from evening until morning before the Lord. This is to be an eternal statute for the Israelites throughout their generations.

    Exodus 31:16 The Israelites must observe the Sabbath, celebrating it throughout their generations as an eternal covenant.

    Exodus 40:15 And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest’s office: for their anointing shall surely be an eternal priesthood throughout their generations.

    Numbers 25:13 It will be a covenant of eternal priesthood for him and his future descendants

    Leviticus 16: 29 “This is to be an eternal statute for you: In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month you are to do no work, both the native and the foreigner who resides among you

    Leviticus 24: 8 The bread is to be set out before the Lord every Sabbath day as a eternal covenant obligation on the part of the Israelites. 9 It belongs to Aaron and his sons, who are to eat it in a holy place, for it is the holiest portion for him from the fire offerings to the Lord; this is an eternal rule.

  8. markmcculley Says:

    the permanent sin which can never be forgiven (Mark 3:29).
    the permanent weight of glory compared with our slight momentary affliction (2 Corinthians 4:17; 1 Peter 5:10).
    the permanent things that are unseen compared to the transient things that are seen (2 Corinthians 4:18).
    the permanent house (body) compared to our present temporary tent (body) (2 Corinthians 5:1).
    the permanent destruction the lost will face at Christ’s return (2 Thessalonians 1:9).
    the permanent hope we have through God’s grace (2 Thessalonians 2:16).
    The permanent judgment that will take place after the resurrection of the dead (Hebrews 6:2).
    The permanent redemption secured by Christ’s sacrifice(Hebrews 9:12).

    http://www.afterlife.co.nz/2013/theology/aionios-meaning/

  9. markmcculley Says:

    http://themelios.thegospelcoalition.org/article/fathers-of-faith-my-fathers-now-on-abraham-covenant-theology-paedobaptism

    Calvin–we by water baptism testify that our children belong to the covenant.

    https://static1.squarespace.com/static/52ed7849e4b00e157ba533f7/t/54241943e4b0e8cce9e058d8/1411651907480/relationship-of-circumcision-to-ergon-nomou.pdf

    “The spiritual is that which is of or by the Holy Spirit.It is not the same thing as spirit, which is invisible and non-physical.”

    https://static1.squarespace.com/static/52ed7849e4b00e157ba533f7/t/54241aafe4b0d11990ee68fd/1411652271328/infant-baptism-new-man-new-creation1.pdf

    Wellum– Nowhere does the NT say that circumcision is now unnecessary because water baptism replaced it. That would have been the most logical answer to the Judaizers, if the paedobaptist position was correct. This answer is never given because baptism is a new rite, applied to each person who has repented and believed, (157)

    Smith–If water baptism replaced circumcision one-for-one, this would have been an easy argument to make for the Apostles. They didn’t make this argument because water baptism did not replace circumcision in a one-to-one fashion

  10. markmcculley Says:

    Meredith Kline–Two distinct levels of fulfillment, one provisional and prototypal, are clearly distinguishable in the promise given to Abraham. Development of the twelve sons of Jacob into the twelve-tribe nation of Israel constituted a fulfillment of the promise of the kingdom people at one level…
    When Paul in Romans 9-11 defends God’s covenantal faithfulness in the face of Israel’s fall, he bases his case on the identification of the promised seed as the individual election, a remnant-fullness of Jews and Gentiles, spiritual children of Abraham, all like him justified by faith (Rom 9:7,8; cf. Rom 4:16; Gal 3:7)
    That the territory eventually occupied by Israel fully corresponded with the geographical bounds defined in the promise is explicitly recorded in Joshua 21:43-45 and 1 Kings 4:20,21 (cf. Num 34:2ff.; 1 Chr 18:3; Ezek 47:13-20)… . With surprising abruptness the New Testament disregards the first level meaning and simply takes for granted that the second level, cosmic fulfillment is the true intention of the promise…
    The issue between covenantal and dispensational hermeneutics is not one of spiritualizing versus nonspiritualizing interpretations of the second level kingdom. For, contrary to a common allegation, the covenantal system as well as the dispensational allows for the geophysical dimension of that kingdom. The basic question at issue is rather how to construe the relation of the two levels of the promised kingdom of the Abrahamic Covenant to one another.

  11. markmcculley Says:

    Dispensationalists might object by saying that God promised this land to Israel unconditionally and as an everlasting possession. But if God gave them the land unconditionally, how could God have set conditions upon Israel in the Mosaic Covenant? How could God have exiled them? How could God have kept them out of the land for 2,000 years if it was promised unconditionally? The land was not promised unconditionally.

    Furthermore, as Paul explains in Romans 9, even this conditional promise to Abraham’s offspring regarding the land was never made to all of Abraham’s physical offspring. Down through history God sovereignly chose who this promise extended to, until it extended only to Christ who fulfilled it typologically, and thus it was made only to Him (Galatians 3:16).

    Regarding the language of “everlasting” Coxe notes “Now it is evident that they have for many ages been disinherited of it. But the solution to this doubt will be easy to him who consults the use of these terms in other texts, and the necessary restriction of their sense when applied to the state or interests of Abraham’s seed in the land of Canaan. For the priesthood of Levi is called an everlasting priesthood (Numbers 25:13) [even though it was abrogated Heb 7] and the gates of the temple, everlasting doors (Psalm 24:5). This is the same sense that Canaan is said to be an everlasting inheritance. No more is intended than the continuance of these for a long time, that is, throughout the Old Testament economy until the days of the Messiah https://contrast2.wordpress.com/2015/09/30/additional-answers-to-founders-conference-qa/

  12. markmcculley Says:

    Romans 9: 7 Neither are they all children because they are Abraham’s children. On the contrary, your children will be traced through Isaac.

    Romans 9: 3 For I could almost wish to be CURSED AND CUT OFF FROM THE MESSIAH for the benefit of my brothers, my own flesh and blood.

    Romans 10 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God concerning the children of Abraham is for their salvation! 2 I can testify about the children of Abraham that they have zeal for God,but not according to knowledge. 3 Because the children of Abraham disregarded the righteousness from God and attempted to establish their own righteousness, the children of Abraham have not submitted themselves to God’s righteousness.

    Romans 9: 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory,the covenants, the giving of the law, the temple service, and THE PROMISES 5 The FATHERS are theirs, and from the FATHER, by physical descent, came the Messiah, who is God

    Romans 9: 7 The older will serve the younger. 13 As it is written: I have loved Jacob, but I have hated Esau.

    • markmcculley Says:

      It is not proper, therefore, to set up a dichotomy whereby according to God’s secret will, election or justification cannot be lost, but according to our covenant perspective they may be lost. The statements cited show a tendency to use typically Calvinistic language with respect to the level of God’s secret will, but in the level of “covenant perspective” to use typically Arminian language (Christ died for you; the elect may become reprobate). There is even the notion that Ephesians 1:1–14 does not “function as canon” in relation to God’s unchangeable decree of predestination, but functions as canon only within that “context of the covenant” where “election” maybe lost. This is a misreading of the doctrine of God’s incomprehensibility. That doctrine does not mean that the perspicuously revealed grace of God in election and justification can be regarded as changeable on the covenant level.

      —Henry W. Coray, Mario Di Gangi, Clarence W. Duff, David Freeman, Donald C. Graham, Edward L. Kellogg, Meredith G. Kline, Robert D. Knudson, Arthur W. Kuschke, David C. Lachman, George W. Marson, W. Stanford Reid, Paul G. Settle, Lelie W. Sloat, William Young to the Trustees of Westminster Theological Seminary (December 4, 1980), 5.

      Bill Smith (federal visionist) — To participate in the covenant the people were baptized into the body of Moses (1 Cor 10.1-2). This is parallel to the Corinthians enjoying the privilege of being baptized into the body of Christ (cp. 1Cor 12.12-13). …Paul makes it clear that they themselves participated in Christ (at least) through the water that came from the Rock. Yes, they looked forward to a greater fulfillment, but they nevertheless communed with Christ himself. The Corinthians have done the same thing

      What is not said by Paul here is as important as what is said concerning the subject of this debate. Paul does not say, “Because you are now sanctified in Christ and in communion with him in the NC community, you have no worries like they did in the past.” Nor does Paul say, “If you fall into idolatry, we must wonder if you ever were really baptized into the body of Christ or had communion with Christ.” The point of the parallel is that the privileges they enjoy as members of Christ’s NC community makes them more responsible and liable to more severe judgment. We cannot draw a contrast where Paul draws a parallel.

      p 19, A predisposition to seeing only the elect as the true members of the new covenant forces people into a position so that they cannot take the warnings of apostasy for NC members seriously enough. The contrast between old and new covenants does not lie at the possibility of apostasy. The contrast lies at the point of the severity of the punishment for those who do not respond in faith to the promises and privileges granted to them

      https://static1.squarespace.com/static/52ed7849e4b00e157ba533f7/t/54241aafe4b0d11990ee68fd/1411652271328/infant-baptism-new-man-new-creation1.pdf

  13. markmcculley Says:

    I Peter 1: 18 For you know that you were redeemed from your empty way of life inherited from the fathers

    Galatians 4: 9 But now, since you know God, or rather have become known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and bankrupt elemental forces? Do you want to be enslaved to them all over again

  14. markmcculley Says:

    Deuteronomy 31 Then Moses continued to speak these words to all Israel… The Lord has told me, ‘You will not cross this Jordan.’ 3 The Lord your God is the One who will cross ahead of you. He will destroy these nations before you. Joshua is the one who will cross ahead of you, as the Lord has said…..6 Be strong and courageous; don’t be terrified or afraid of them. For it is the Lord your God who goes with you; He will not leave you or forsake you
    Isaiah 45: 15 Truly You are God, who hide Yourself,
    O God of Israel, the Savior!
    16 They shall be ashamed
    And also disgraced, all of them;
    Isaiah 57: 17 The Lord said–Because of his sinful greed I was angry, so I struck him. I was angry and hid from the sinner, but the sinner went on turning back to the desires of his own heart.
    I Corinthians 2: 20 For every one of God’s promises is “Yes” in Christ

    http://themelios.thegospelcoalition.org/article/is-every-promise-yes-old-testament-promises-and-the-christian

    Jason DeRouchie–“While the plural “promises” (ἐπαγγελίαι) in Galatians 3:16 suggests that all the promises of land, seed, and blessing find their fulfillment in Christ, the fact that Paul specifically cites the land promise from Genesis highlights how only in relation to Christ can we understand the land inheritance.”

    God has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through these promises you become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire” (2 Pet 1:4)

    My God will supply every need of yours according to his riches in Christ Jesus” (Phil 4:19)

    No man shall be able to stand before you all the days of your life. Just as I was with Moses, so I will be with you. I will not leave you or forsake you” (Joshua 1:5).

    Deuteronomy 30: 7 the LORD your God will put all these curses now on you on your enemies

    II Corinthians 6: if you walk in my statutes and observe my commandments and do them, … 11 I will make my dwelling among you…12 And I will walk among you and will be your God, and you shall be my people.

    some of the promises are curses

    all the promises are yes but not all are fulfilled

    the Holy Spirit is not all our inheritance

  15. markmcculley Says:

    James Haldane –“although an oath was made to Abraham, securing the blessing to all families of the earth through him, this does not prove that the covenant made with him was the new covenant… This was a promise that the Savour, revealed immediately after the fall, Gen. iii. 15. should spring from him… To call this the covenant of grace, is only calculated to mislead; for surely it was peculiar to Abraham that Christ should spring from him.”

  16. markmcculley Says:

    Ephesians 3: 14 For this reason I kneel before the Father 15 from whom every FAMILY in the sky and on earth is named

    Ephesians 3: 3 The mystery was made known TO ME by REVELATION. 4 By reading this you are able to understand MY knowledge about the mystery of the Messiah.5 This mystery was NOT made known to people in other ages as it is NOW revealed to His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit

    Genesis 50 Then Joseph, leaning over his father’s face, wept and kissed him. 2 He commanded his servants who were physicians to embalm his father. So they embalmed Israel. 3 They took 40 days to complete this, for embalming takes that long, and the Egyptians mourned for him 70 days.

    4 When the days of mourning were over, Joseph said to Pharaoh’s household, “If I have found favor with you, please tell Pharaoh that 5 my father made me take an oath, saying, ‘I am about to die. You must bury me there in the tomb that I made for myself in the land of Canaan.’Now let me go and bury my father. Then I will return.

    https://www.facebook.com/Hinkletown.Menno.School/


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: