What's 'New' About the New Covenant? #biblestudy #jeremiah31

In this episode we study Jeremiah’s Old Covenant prophecy announcing God’s promise of a New Covenant in Jeremiah 31:31–34. We’re going to answer the question: How does New Covenant differ from the Old Covenant? What exactly makes it new? We’ll look at its historical and prophetic context, the essence of what it is, and its fulfillment as prophecy. We’ll also look at who the New Covenant was made with and what it means that God will write his law (or his Torah) on their hearts. And in our discussion, we’ll be drawing a bit from the book "Sealed with an Oath" by Paul Williamson. We’ll also bring in comments from several other scholars. And I think you’ll find this fascinating discussion.

LINKS TO VIDEOS MENTIONED IN THIS EPISODE
5 Reasons we can't follow the Gospel and the Law at the same time

Are Christians under a New or Renewed Covenant?

Grafted Into What? Jews, Gentiles & Israel

+++

DONATE TO OUR MINISTRY

OUR LINKS

CHAPTERS
00:00 Introduction
01:23 The Old and New Covenants
08:34 Historical of Jer. 31:31–34
11:14 Biblical context of Jer. 31:31–34
23:16 What makes the New Covenant new?
24:53 Difference #1
26:45 Difference #2
27:57 Difference #3
31:51 Difference #4
35:21 Difference #5
36:51 The New Covenant People
42:42 The New Covenant Law

[standez]

Your studies are sorely needed in a day of such biblical ignorance. I will be following your teachings as i find it helps me to know why i believe what i believe. :)

[SmutchyBritches]

Thank you so much for taking the time to share with us these wonderful detailed and concise studies.

[ayandapeter]

Sir, thank you for your work, systematic teaching is really needed in our generation and I deeply appreciate and respect what you stand for...please don't stop, I'm learning deep things from you. (from South Africa)

[liselottevestergaard]

Amen and great teaching. I really think you are very respectfull, loving and gentle in your way to reach the Torah keeping people. I have heard and seen many onthers who make fun and speek in a disrespect tone and that is not loving as Jesus teaches us.
So I really enjoy your videos and your loving way of teaching. Keep doing that.

Don’t get down on the same sad level as others in here…
It’s so sad How people forget to love eachother the same way as Jesus..

Jesus our savior bless you and your work ✝️🤗

[HopeUnknown]

This was a really great video! Thank you for your teaching!

[melissahasart]

Another great video! Thanks again for all your comprehensive videos.

[thomashcase]

Very good video. What I do like is your adding of some additional information and context surrounding the passage in Jeremiah. Too often, the focus is in Hebrews and misses some context. Unfortunately, as much as the added context is important and beneficial, I still feel it might lack in a couple area that the objectors will raise or will underlie in their presuppositions. First, more/additional context is needed establishing that Jesus has initiated/established the New Covenant (last supper). One objection I often hear is that Hebrew Roots believers say they believe all the Jeremiah prophecy is still in the future (not yet part of already but not yet nature of the Kingdom of God). Of course, they have to reinterpret or in some cases cast away what the author of Hebrews rights. Most often I see they arguing that Hebrews author is also speaking of future not present. They do the same with Isaiah's prophecy (some versus about the messiah and some about 2nd coming -- within same section). While it is true that some prophecy has a future and future-future sense, I don't believe Hebrews can be interpreted as all still in the future. The second, more subtle presupposition, is due to denial of Trinity, their is a lack of understanding of how Jesus has to be Yahweh otherwise his sacrifice could not have met the requirements of the law and fulfilled the punishment for sin so that our sins will be remembered no more. The believe that Jesus was a created agent and not God (Trinitarian view) leads to the believe that the New Covenant is still future also and why the Old Covenant is still in affect. This has been debated for centuries, but going back to an old recent debate, the debate with James White and Michael Brown had with a Sir Anthony Buzzard and Joseph Good on the Trinity really deals with the issues. Joseph Good is the foundational scholar that most of the current "elders" in the Hebrew Roots movement point to. Buzzard and Good's argumentation can be seen repeated in current modern debates like between Anthony Rodgers and Sean Griffin and the most recent between Andrew Schumacher and Sean Griffen. Sean basically is repeating the arguments (not as successfully) of Good and Buzzard. White's recent debate with Universalist Dale Tuggy covers similar grounds. The point being if the presupposition is anti-trinitarian, then what you presented here will not be believed. Your presentation here is very in depth but starts with a trinitarian and new covenant was established by Jesus position. It would be good to flesh out what those are solid underlying presuppositions.

[jimijames]

Dr Solberg thank you for your tireless efforts!!
Blessings upon you, your wife and your children.
I ask God to keep you and yours. God Be with you!

[dashaunjefferies]

idk if you interact with your comment section much but firstly, thank you! I've dealt w Hebrew Israelism (the much more aggressive, racist, hateful branch of Hebrew Roots Movement) for years and have refuted their teachings almost on my own studies the exact same way you do (nothing like a cult to make you read your bible), so I'm binging your content out of relief and joy haha. #Subscribed

So far you've covered almost every important, common point that I personally have interacted with concerning Hebrew Israelites (HIs). I just have one request concerning Sabbath that I haven't found in your content yet...and that's certain claims & rationales Jesus uses when challenged on the sabbath. I'd just like your take on my thought process on the passage(s) and the passages themselves. Feel free to respond in the comments or make a vid; I'm here for it either way! God bless and shalom.

The talking points are usually something like "Jesus never encouraged, hinted at, or broke sabbath day observance (or any Mosaic law). He didn't work on the sabbath, and if he 'broke' it, it was merely tradition he broke. If he did break one of God's laws he cannot be sinless". Lots of HIs are anti-tradition.
---In John 5, the offense seems to not lie in the healing but in the carrying of the bed. The man is "carrying a burden" which seems to be in direct opposition to Jer 17:21. Jesus ultimately gets confronted and his rationale/defense is the bc the Father is working he is working. "Working" is the same word as the LXX translates from Ex 20:10 "but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work (ergon)". Jesus seems to be doing one the common patterns of intensifying the charge. His rationale essentially means "The Father is breaking the sabbath therefore I do to, bc I am equal with him" He seems to appeal to his deity to supersede the command (after all, YHWH issued it and is above it). Moreover he hints that the Father has BEEN working until this point in time, which, in my opinion, further implies the future sabbath rest with no end, spoken of in the creation account.
--In Matt 12/Mark 2, it could be argued that the gathering of grain was similar to the breaking of Jer 17:21 and Neh 13:15, but I've heard it more in line with breaking Pharisaical tradition, so we can roll with that if you want. Jesus' response was that "David and those with him broke it and it was okay. The priests themselves work on the sabbath and it's okay. Both groups are guiltless." Many liken the disciples' being hungry and therefore eating plucking grain to David's starving and being chased situation to explain why Jesus is saying they can break the sabbath, which I feel are incongruent, in all honesty. It actually feels more like gathering stick to cook bc you're hungry than David's dire situation, in my opinion. The common thread, here, seems to be related to the idea of serving God as a "priest" in some fashion. Those of God in Israel were supposed to be seen as a "nation of priests", meaning David in some capacity was excused as a priest for his faith and priestly shadow (like the linen ephod). The Levitical priests were excused bc they're serving God in the temple per God's decree. And those who follow Messiah are seen as priests as echoed by Peter, Revelation, and more explicitly in Hebrews 13:10 "We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat". Since Christ is the temple believers serve in as priests, their work is as God commands it, when he commands, much like the earthly levitical priests. I think this is why he alludes to being greater than the temple in Matt....but I can't quite figure out what "the sabbath was made for man not man for the sabbath" namely the "...man for the sabbath" part means nor how it plays into the overarching flow of thought in Mark. I also don't quite understand how "I desire mercy not sacrifice" plays into this either, but it obviously plays into the temple somehow, I think. I guess it would be important to qualify or clarify what "lawful to do good on the sabbath" means too...He then concludes the first encounter in Matt with "the son of man is lord over the sabbath" which is a trump-all authority card that doesn't seem to warrant explaining.

--I figure whatever clarity we gain from these passages can be applied to other "sabbath challenge" passes, unless I've missed some other important line of logic that isn't self-evident elsewhere

To summarize, the points I raise in both these passages is that Jesus seems to play INTO the accusation (breaking sabbath), not DENYING it, saying he's working like the Father is or implying that even though he breaks it, he and his disciples are guiltless, like David and priests. In both examples he appeals to authority: one to the Father and being his son, the other to himself as the lord of the sabbath. I just dont follow the line of 100% clearly esp when he references mercy>sacrifice and "man not being made for sabbath"...I noticed that the word "unlawful/not lawful" is not the same word used by Peter in Acts 10:28, if that matters at all. The "dilemma" for the position I hold is this, according to the HIs: he couldn't have broken it (like actually broken it, not merely some tradition) because he wouldn't have been sinless. If he did break it (like actually break it) then he wasn't bound by the Mosaic covenant while he walked earth pre-death, which makes me have to qualify other verses that I'm sure you're already thinking of....I think I tend to the latter since we've already established that, even though the disciples didn't get it, he taught all foods were clean while alive pre-cross...at least that's where I am right now...

If you read this, I apologize for being unclear or confusing if I have been, but I'd be sooo grateful for your input on this as I've been contemplating making some kind of playlist to refute common Hebrew Roots talking points and misused verses (it's swept a lot of men and women of color away from the truth). You exegete in similar fashion to me and it would be a blessing to get your thoughts. Peace and love, man

[mochamarie]

Thank you. This video helped me to keep in my faith in Jesus Christ. So much stuff online and social media to target Christians to lose faith. I have a pretty solid background and I almost fell off. I got kids. I cannot lose my faith.

[dicksonmanongi]

Thanks for the clear hermeneutics. Enjoy the teaching and blessed.

[WilliamDeanIII]

I would love to get your opinion on New Covenant Theology. Especially in relation of the Decalogue for sanctification in light of Deuteronomy 4:13, Exodus 34:28, and Hebrews 7:12. The big question that arises if there's a tripartite division of the Mosaic Law, if so, can you exegete this from scripture. Thank you!

[adventures]

You really hit a home run with this video. Good information.

[swebb]

Christ IS Israel! I resisted this at first but as I continued to suspend my rejection of it until I could study it I finally realized it, and so clear to see and can not un-see it now! If you're IN Christ you're part of Israel because He IS Israel! Israel as a people existed to be the delivery system of the Messiah to the world. 'All the families of the earth' have been blessed by God IN Christ as promised to Abraham and we're heirs according to that promise! Israel was also a 'type' with Christ being the 'anit-type' in so many ways it's magical!

[kimartist]

Torahists don't seem to comprehend that the Author/Husband of the Mosaic covenant died, leaving Him free to marry another.

[chetanpaulr]

Both of the covenants are made with ethnic Israel only as they are the only house hold that God chose out of all the world, but the new covenant through Christ Jesus our Lord invited Gentiles into the household more freely through faith in the done work of Jesus Christ than the invitation to the gentiles in the old covenant by Moses through works commanded to be done by Faith looking forward to the work of God in the future.

[annabernice]

He is writing the law, Torah, on the hearts of Israel and Judah. (Jeremiah and Hebrews)
Everyone else is blessed to be a part of it.
A good bible study will show he did not throw away his people. In their Israel and Judah's disobedience, he is using heathens to make them jealous so that they will return to him.

[keishabailey]

God's standards do not change to suit people. People have to change to suit God's standards

[ennisel]

30:18 - it's being renewed, not fully, would you say? as we're encouraged daily to so; wehave to put that work of faith in w/ the aid of the spirit, no?

[ennisel]

42:30 - so what happens when messiah returns to the faithful Jews, cause it's not until his appearing scripture tells us they'll own him?

43:10 - We do have to remember the law was given to Israel primarily and they will still be ministering and functioning to the nations in the millennial reign; these laws are about how the Kingdom the disciples/apostles in the beginning of Acts were hoping would be restored post haste.

43:36 - Sha'ul spoke on this; the jews are to remain jews and the gentile believers are to remain gentile; the law stands for those it is applicable to, depending on the level of holiness they are called to.
🤔🤔 How Yehovah deals w/ sin isn't the law, but a reward; death or Life depending on how the law is carried out.