Posted on 07/03/2025 5:38:42 PM PDT by Angelino97
I have just finished reading “The Old Covenant: Revoked or Not Revoked?” by Dr. Robert Sungenis. It is a study debunking the notion, now regnant in liberal theological circles, that the Old Covenant still stands side-by-side with the New Covenant.
According to this novelty, in essence, God’s “A Plan” and God’s “B Plan” are both currently pleasing to Him and both fully in effect.
Opposed to this, the Catholic Faith teaches that the Old Law — itself good, holy, and of divine origin — was a preparation for the New, and that the New Law superceded and fulfilled the Old.
Indeed, as Dr. Sungenis shows, Pope John Paul II affirmed the traditional teaching in a not-much-quoted passage of Redemptoris Mater: “Christ fulfills the divine promise and supersedes the old law.”
Years ago, I made an effort at debunking this vogue theology in an article on the Epistle to the Hebrews: A Better Testament. Dr. Sungenis quotes from Hebrews, but he does not limit himself to this, as the pilfered quotations below adequately show.
The following is a series of scriptural, patristic, and magisterial citations from “The Old Covenant: Revoked or Not Revoked?“:
Hebrews 7:18: “On the one hand, a former commandment is annulled because of its weakness and uselessness…”;
Hebrews 10:9: “Then he says, ‘Behold, I come to do your will.’ He takes away the first [covenant] to establish the second [covenant]…”;
2 Corinthians 3:14: “For to this day when they [the Jews] read the Old Covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away”;
Hebrews 8:7: “For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another”;
Colossians 2:14: “Having canceled the written code, with its decrees, that was against us and stood opposed to us; He took it away nailing it to the cross”;
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, para. 29: “…the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished…but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross”;
The Catechism of the Council of Trent: “…the people, aware of the abrogation of the Mosaic Law…”;
Council of Florence: “that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law…although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began”;
Council of Trent: “but not even the Jews by the very letter of the law of Moses were able to be liberated or to rise therefrom”;
Cardinal Ratzinger: “Thus the Sinai [Mosaic] Covenant is indeed superseded” (Many Religions – One Covenant, p. 70).
St. John Chrysostom: “Yet surely Paul’s object everywhere is to annul this Law….And with much reason; for it was through a fear and a horror of this that the Jews obstinately opposed grace” (Homily on Romans, 6:12); “And so while no one annuls a man’s covenant, the covenant of God after four hundred and thirty years is annulled; for if not that covenant but another instead of it bestows what is promised, then is it set aside, which is most unreasonable” (Homily on Galatians, Ch 3);
St. Augustine: “Instead of the grace of the law which has passed away, we have received the grace of the gospel which is abiding; and instead of the shadows and types of the old dispensation, the truth has come by Jesus Christ. Jeremiah also prophesied thus in God’s name: ‘Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah…’ Observe what the prophet says, not to Gentiles, who had not been partakers in any former covenant, but to the Jewish nation. He who has given them the law by Moses, promises in place of it the New Covenant of the gospel, that they might no longer live in the oldness of the letter, but in the newness of the spirit” (Letters, 74, 4);
Justin Martyr: Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law – namely, Christ – has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy…Have you not read…by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: ‘Behold, the days come,’ says the Lord, ‘that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah…’” (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch 11).
“For the Lord will not cast off His people, nor will He forsake His inheritance.” (Psalm 94:14)
“I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption to sonship; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of the Messiah, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.”
(Romans 9:2-5)
“As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake; but as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.”
(Romans 11:28–29)
“And so all Israel will be saved…” (Romans 11:26)
I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew.
(Romans 11:1-2)
Much more,,,,,
In the simplest of terms,
1. The Catholic Church and some other denominations recognize the continuing covenantal status of the Jewish people on the basis of all the scriptural teachings (some of which are set forth above), but nevertheless the Catholic Church teaches that the Jewish people are saved by virtue of God’s love/ mercy (this is consistent with Jewish understanding) — as expressed via Jesus (there is, therefore, but one covenant which includes both Christian’s and Jews). The Catholic Church also teaches that rejecting the Jewish covental status is both error —as both testaments teach (see above).
2. Some churches teach that there are two salvation covenants, the Jewish covenant(s) (which is “irrevocable” per both the OT/Hebrew Scriptures and the NT/ Greek Scriptures, as above) and a new covenant for Christians via Jesus). This takes the “mystery” out of the Catholic understanding of one covenant including both Jewish and Christian peoples. As a practical result, both approaches have both faith communities “saved,” just via slightest different interpretations.
3. A third understanding is to see the Christian salvation as arising via the Biblical promise to the people of Israel (which include both the Jewish people and those “grafted in” as per Paul — by virtue of God deeming them to be a part of His promised ingathering of exiled Israel. This understanding builds on how the term People of Israel is used in the Bible, and history.
4 There are still some churches which teach various versions of “replacement” or “supercessionist” theology, whereby they view themselves as saved but not the Jewish people (or, usually, anybody else). This can be supported via a selected excepting of passages such as the well- known John 3:16. (But it requires ignoring many other Biblical teachings from Genesis through at least Saint Paul.)
Thus, several understandings. And we haven’t even mentioned British Israelism or the LDS church or several more understandings.
So, anyone who wants to can throw their tomatoes in just about any direction s/he wishes. As for me, I’m ducking out now. I can’t afford another cleaners bill
Smiles smiles.
It's not technically correct.
A Messianic Jew is a Jew who is facing the right direction (Christ) but hasn't fully climbed on board.
The Jews who convert are Christians. Full stop. (They may identify ethnically as Jews, as convert Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger, former Archbishop of Paris did, but these are not Messianic Jews.)
They were not. Had they been Messianic Jews, they would have kept Jewish dietary practices, and we know from Scripture that they didn't.
That wasn’t the one I was referring to.
They split the last one into two and made don’t covert your neighbor’s wife one and don’t covet your neighbor’s goods separate, and messed with the one about not making idols.
https://www.beginningcatholic.com/catholic-ten-commandments
Charming - and weird. Sometimes, Just yourthoughts should remain unspoken.
The New Covenant bears and takes up into it by recapitulation (Eph 1:10) all the former promises to Abraham and Israel but it does not allow for a dual-covenant understanding of the recapitulation in Christ. The Mosaic covenant has become “obsolete” (cf. Hebrews 8:13) and the New Covenant is superior and determinative of God’s Israel. The Mosaic covenant was “provisional” and “pedagogical” (cf. CCC #122) and “broken” (Jeremiah 31:32).
Luke 22:16-20 - The Covenant is everlasting:
For I say to you, that from this time I will not eat it, till it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And having taken the chalice, he gave thanks, and said: Take, and divide it among you: For I say to you, that I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, till the kingdom of God come. And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me. In like manner the chalice also, after he had supped, saying: This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which shall be shed for you.
Galatians 3:16 To Abraham were the promises made and to his seed. He saith not, And to his seeds, as of many: but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Some Messianic Jews are 100% Gentile.
Long ago I was reading an article or LTE (I forget which) in The Jewish Journal of Los Angeles. The writer was bashing Messianic Jews, saying they were a Christian Trojan Horse built to infiltrate the Jewish community, then trick Jews away from Judaism.
He also said that many Messianic Jewish synagogues had more Gentile than Jewish members.
I don't know how accurate he was. But I can see how that would be a thing. That some Christian Dispensationalists would convert to Messianiac Judaism in a misguided attempt to "get closer to Jesus."
Post 10
Perhaps, it is time to list the covenants and categorize them as either conditional or unconditional.
Looking forward to the response.
God made 3 Covenants with Abraham
#1 to make of them a great nation Gen. 15, fulfilled in the founding of Israel by Moses Ex. 24;2
# 2 to make of them a great kingdom Gen. 17, initially fulfilled in David and his royal descendants
Samuel 16
#3 to make of them a universal blessing Gen. 22 fulfilled in Jesus Christ Luke 1:26-33; Matt. 28:18-20
The 3rd Covenant was made at the Last Supper and was complete at Pentecost in which the Kingdom of God began.
What is this 3rd covenant? John 6:53-58
Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. 58 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me.
I can place myself at the time of Christ and see it was a ‘hard saying’ but then I see how many Christians in this day and age find it a ‘hard saying’.
Exodus 12:23 For the Lord will pass through striking the Egyptians: and when he shall see the blood on the transom, and on both the posts, he will pass over the door of the house, and not suffer the destroyer to come into your houses and to hurt you.
About that Rapture thing...
Do you have any non-generic posts regarding dual covenant theology or responses to my #51 post?
Yes, they did do that. They bow down to things so they essentially took out the 2nd commandment, and split the 10th to keep 10. All this was prophecied. She is the great whore of babylon the counterfeit. It’s a system. We never judge individuals. That’s God’s business. But we can judge a false system especially the one prophecied with dates, timelines, and clear descriptions.
The protestant reformers of old never identified her as such and they never believed in today’s dual covenant theology. There was never anything wrong with the law of God and it needed no change. Not one jot or tittle. The problem was with the people. That’s why they made the Sabbath day a burden......it never got into their hearts. None of the gospel did. Today’s Catholic system is the same effect. A cold transactional religion. Go to confession, confess your sin and go out and do it all over again.
They lift up the church and it’s history and tradition......and saints and Mary and Fathers....more than they do the lowly humble Savior.
No. I wasn’t part of that discussion.
Far as I can tell from reading Scripture, there are two covenants. The old one, the Law, and the new one that Jesus talked about, salvation through faith in Him through His atoning death that actually was capable of dealing with the sin for good and not just covering it up.
I don’t see where Jesus refers to any first, second, third, whatever, number of covenants. Just the old and the new.
How silly of me. They celebrated the Resurrection with a BBQ Pork Roast. It's gotta be somewhere in the Bible. We'll die without pork, right? The streets of Heaven will be lined with bacon.
Dietary indulgence against Gods wishes resulted in eviction from the Garden of Eden and the death of mankind. You'll quote some cryptic verse about meat sacrificed to idols or something about "all meats" while the audience at that time knew very well about clean and unclean and knew it did not include unclean. But go ahead, enlighten me.
Buy a book on it or hire a clerk. I don't have time.
——>The new covenant was made with believing Israel and Judah.
And then there was this...
Matthew 21:Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
Acts 13:46
Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: “It was necessary to speak the word of God to you first. But since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles.
Acts 28:28
Be advised, therefore, that God’s salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!”
Israel, AS A NATION, is finished. They rejected Christ, and there is no coming back from that. God cancelled their favored status ticket. However, salvation is open to all INDIVIDUALLY, who call on the name of Christ as their Savior.
Galatians 3:28-29
There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. / And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.
The Law is separate from the Old Covenant. They are two different revelations with two different purposes. They are certainly not synonymous. Why confuse people with mistruths?
Acts 18:5-6
When Silas and Timothy came from Macedonia, Paul devoted himself exclusively to preaching, testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah. But when they opposed Paul and became abusive, he shook out his clothes in protest and said to them, “Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent of it. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.”
That boldface line indicates there is no special dispensation for Jews who reject Christ. No special salvation by virtue of their DNA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.