4147To help in understanding
- Apr 8, 2002--- In covenantedreformationclub@y..., "raging_calvinist"
> Tim, could you please explain what you meant by this?Tp - Jason appeared to be arguing that God, in the Jeremiah 7 vs. was
> "But since God did not reserve the right to freely make changes in
> the covenant at any time, if He had made a such a change in the
> covenant legislation by Jeremiah 7:31 as is argued, He would have
> broken covenant with Israel."
> Specifically, who is arguing that God changed anything in the
> Covenant? Are you saying that, according to the Reformed view, the
> phrase "which I commanded not, neither came it into my heart" would
> mark a change in the Covenant?
adding a regulation to the covenant. In reply, I pointed out that a
characteristic of covenants (unless otherwise specified) pointed out
by Paul in Gal 3:15 is that they were unchangeable. While God can do
what He wants to do, if His underlying purpose is to maintain a
righteous covenant relationship with His subjects in order to glorify
His name and give them no grounds to mistrust Him, He may not change
the terms of a previously instituted covenant unless the covenant
specifically provides that He may do so, which it does not.
Interpreting the phrase "which I commanded not, neither came it into
my heart" to mean God is adding something to the covenant therefore,
instead of using litotes to remind the Israelites that what the were
doing was already forbidden, cannot be right, since under the
conditions as stated, God would be breaking covenant with Israel
>Hope this helps clear things up for you.
Note to Jason - I too do not want you to shut up. What I should have
said in my post is, that to paraphrase a remark from C. S. Lewis'
essay "Bulverism" in "God in the Dock" that all of us and not just
you in particular need to remember is that we must prove THAT someone
is wrong before we speculate about WHY he is wrong.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>