I think this nicely, and succinctly, articulates the difference:

that is so simple, but does that mean we really get it?

i remember one time when i had been shown a demonstration of a math manipulative problem and it was fairly self-evident. but another time i was with a group of teachers who were stuggling to understand it, and i was just staring at them cause i didnt have a clue how to make it any more simple-or self evident since it was right there in front of their face.

finally one teacher goes, "im trying to make this more complicated than it is".

this is somewhat different because it is not a physical, visible, thing we can see. and it is "spiritual". but it seems like we can read that over and over and it take years to "take". once it does, it is just so simple...

this is very good to think about.

Comment: .................................
Many excellent comments on the means of grace have been made in our discussions so far. I would like to continue with presentations of well known beliefs in the Christian world, in this case “New Covenant Theology.” The above quotation shows a contrast between Covenant Theology and New Covenant Theology. Obviously, Covenant Theology is closer to the truth as we understand it -- we believe that God is not whimsical, but has just ONE standard of faith for all men at all times, and that the Old Testament law is still binding on Christians today.

Does God have more than one “post fall covenant?” Or are these better seen as different presentations of the Everlasting Covenant? Was there any covenant before the fall? In my opinion, sinless beings were under law, and in their perfect environment they happily kept that law. No covenant was needed.

New Covenant Theology “sees perfect obedience to the Mosaic Law as impossible” is a denial of the power of grace. One may argue about what “perfect” means. We can be assured that it is God who makes that judgment, and He is merciful.

References:
1. Steve Lehrer, New Covenant Theology: Questions Answered, 2006, p. 47. The Covenant of Works is a covenant in which you earn God's eternal favor by obedience to His commands."
2. Steve Lehrer, New Covenant Bible Fellowship in Tempe, Arizona; Ben Ditzel, of Truth Ministries: New Covenant Theology: Questions Answered, pp. 155, 181-182. Old Covenant obsolete, and none of the commands of the law are binding on believers today.

Well said.
In fact, the only Scriptural purpose of the law is to show us our sinfulness and lead us to Christ for forgiveness and His Gift of Righteousness. And...

"Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law."

The problem with that is that it equates New Covenant with the Old Covenant (the law given at Sinai). Both Jeremiah and Hebrews accentuates the difference:

Heb 8:6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.

7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. 8But God found fault with the people and said:
"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.
9 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their forefathers
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
10 This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time, declares the Lord.
I will put my laws in their minds
and write them on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor,
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,'
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more."

13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.

DrPatti,
Just wanted to say hello. I haven't seen you around in a while. It is good to see your input.

Agape`

Hi, Wayne!
Thanks for noticing! :)
Good to see you!

Still love your sig line! :)
I had forgotten. :)

Hubb, seems like we've been down this road before. As God speaks of salvation, he does not use EVERLASTING COVENANT, but talks of an OLD and NEW Covenant and the Great Abrahamic Promise. To refer to it your way, you have to ask, are you talking of the Everlasting Covenant as:

1. The Flood

2. Circumcision

3. The Sabbath

4. Or the Great Promise to Abraham.

Your verbage is not as the Bible gives it. Everlasting is used on many things that never were everlasting, i.e. Circumcision.


First, does the Bible refer to God's salvific plan for man as an Everlasting Covenant?? Texts please:

EVERLASTING - PERPETUAL - FOREVER

When people see any of these words, they at once conclude that they mean that they will never end - or, there is no end. But in the Bible that is not necessarily true. The words have to be studied in their context and their relation to the entire Scripture base.

One may say: "Well, it says everlasting, perpetual, or forever, and I just believe it means what it says". On the surface, it sounds good.

(Read the rest of the reason Everlasting Covenant is not the term we should use for the Plan of Salvation, lest we confuse each other)

http://www.simplebiblestudies.com/GAeverlasting.htm