Covenants

[Traveler]

I would like to share my understanding of covenants. I will begin by saying that it appears to me that everything sacred and everything brought to man by G-d comes by covenant and that G-d expects man to receive everything of sacred nature from him is by covenant. For example it is by covenant and only by covenant that the future can be known or is made secure.

The scriptures are a documentary of covenants, those that are obedient to covenants with G-d and those that are not obedient to covenants with G-d. I do not believe anything in scripture should be interpreted or understood outside the context of covenants. I believe a primary reason G-d gave us scriptures is so that we understand our covenants with him.

From the Old Testament and the covenant of Abraham we have a template of what comprises a covenant with G-d so that we can know what to look for in determining a true covenant from G-d. The first part of a covenant is the commandment part. G-d tests or builds men’s faith through commandments as part of his covenant method. A commandment is an expression of G-d’s will concerning G-d’s expectation of man’s response to him in order to enable the power of faith in G-d and to put the covenant into binding effect. As incentive G-d offers three basic blessings to those that are obedient (exercise faith in him) to the covenant commands. The blessings of G-d are both temporal and spiritual. The temporal is given because we currently live in a temporal environment and that through the temporal we might understand and come to a knowledge of that which is spiritual.

One of the blessings of covenant is the blessing of a promised land or a place to dwell. The temporal representation to Abraham was the land known as Palestine. The spiritual counter part for a promised land is the promise to dwell in heaven which is the Promised Land for eternity where the obedient to G-d’s commandments given by covenant to dwell or appointed to dwell.

Another blessing of covenant we learn from Abraham is the blessing of an enduring prosperity. The temporal representation to Abraham is that his seed will endure all time and will be the means by which all the world (temporal world) is blessed or receives the things of G-d. The spiritual counterpart of enduring prosperity is the promise of “eternal life” within the structure of the eternal “kingdom” of G-d from which all others will draw spiritual strength (blessings) from the obedient that stand in the presents of before G-d.

The final blessing of covenant we learn from Abraham is the blessing of protection. The temporal representation to Abraham is that when the enemies or adversary of Abraham make war, attack, make trouble or seek to destroy or enslave us; that G-d will come as a “deliverer”, or “savior” and defeat the enemies of Abraham. The spiritual counterpart of this promise is the deliverance from our spiritual adversary Satan and the protection from the ravages or bondage of sin for those that are obedient to the covenant.

One example of a broken covenant in scripture is when Israel broke the covenant with G-d by disobedience to the commandments; without the protection and deliverance of G-d the adversaries of Israel were able to conquer and take them into bondage. Only those, “a remnant”, that renewed the sacred covenants and demonstrated their loyalty and obedience to G-d and his covenant through the upholding of the commandments were preserved, delivered and returned to the “land of promise”. I believe this is given a prophesy

Some points concerning covenants with G-d.

1. G-d is the instigator of covenants, not man – man does not have authority to invent covenants and tell G-d what the covenants are or should be. Man is not even justified in making up covenants to give to other men and then claim they came from G-d. The scriptural term for removing G-d from authoring divine covenant, is blasphemy.

2. G-d either provides the covenant himself or the covenants are brought to man through a servant of G-d (with a direct link G-d or to someone that received the covenant directly from G-d). If a man brings the covenant they act for G-d through proxy (note that each time the covenant is presented the presenter acts as G-d by proxy).

3. It is a sacrilege to accept a covenant form someone other than G-d or his chosen proxy. This is the same as worshiping other G-ds.

4. It is also a sacrilege to reject a covenant or the person G-d has appointed as his covenant proxy. This is the same as rejecting G-d.

5. Covenants are made through the formality of ordinance (an example is Baptism – a note here. When Jesus went unto John the Baptist to be baptized, John was the chosen servant acting as the proxy of G-d. John recognizing Jesus as the Christ and being confused thought he could not be a proxy of G-d to Jesus, who is the G-d of the covenant given in the ordinance of baptism – therefore indicating that Jesus should baptize him).

The Traveler

[Guest Syble]

Good post. I found something in what you wrote which a lot of people may have not seen.

Lots of people feel that God isn't answering their prayers and they feel abandoned.

The truth is they are not totally commited to God. They try testing God, instead of taking the part as the one being tested.

Your analysis of covenants and reference to the scriptures being a record of covenants among the people rather than the people themselves is a persceptive one. One I have never thought of before.

[Traveler]

Good post. I found something in what you wrote which a lot of people may have not seen.

Lots of people feel that God isn't answering their prayers and they feel abandoned.

The truth is they are not totally commited to God. They try testing God, instead of taking the part as the one being tested.

Your analysis of covenants and reference to the scriptures being a record of covenants among the people rather than the people themselves is a persceptive one. One I have never thought of before.

Thanks for your input

The Traveler

I thought to add some additional thoughts concerning covenants, but not knowing if there is interest. I am concerned that there have been few comments – I wonder if covenants are understood and appreciated.

It appears to me that most disputations in doctrine are misunderstandings of covenant. Even discussions concerning the Trinity verses the LDS understanding of 3 G-ds, the fall, the role of the Messiah as the Son of G-d, Intelligent Design verses Evolution, Separation of Church and State, Agency and what is necessary for salvation. Even the concept of marriage and who should marry and have the rights to marriage is all wrapped up in understanding covenants.

Even the concept of Satan as Lucifer fallen takes on different concepts when considering covenant and heir to covenant. There is one poster who has a quote at the end of their posts something along the line that “power corrupts and ultimate power corrupts ultimately”, takes on a different meaning to those that understand eternal covenants.

Many scriptures are not understood without an understanding of covenants. Some examples are “The Prodigal Son”, “The Good Samaritan”, Walking the second mile, having eyes to see and ears to hear, the question concerning a blind man “Who sinned – this man or his parents?”, “Be ye therefore Perfect” and the list goes on and on.

In English the Old Testament begins with “In the beginning”, this phrase could just as easily be written (and perhaps much better understood) with the variant reading from the ancient Hebrew, “When G-d first covenanted with man”. What an interesting thought, that G-d began by created the heaven and the earth because of a predisposition of his value for mankind based on a covenant.

The Traveler

[Guest Syble]

I would appreciate you expounding just a little further on the following:

Covenant:

power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Good Samaritan.

Blindman.

It isn't that I couldn't come up with my own idea here, but I would be interested in just

how you are seeing how the covenant works in these as either positive or negative.

IOW is it Gods power which corrupts? The power He gives them, taking it back to the scripture written by JS when he stated that give a man a little power etc.

Or with the Good Samaritan. Was it an example of those who were covenanted not fulfilling their covenant but the one who wasn't fulfilled it and thereby became covenanted--- or--- was the Samaritan the one who was covenanted somehow in the pre-existence and fulfilling it, while others who had been covenanted maybe by word and deed, but not spiritually covenanted from the beginning? or was but didn't live up to it spiritually speaking?

As you can see there are many ways to go here and I would appreciate you nailing it down for me from your point of view.

If you could start your last post over and expound upon each and every thing as it pertains to the covenant.

Thanks.

[Traveler]

I would appreciate you expounding just a little further on the following:

Covenant:

power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Good Samaritan.

Blindman.

It isn't that I couldn't come up with my own idea here, but I would be interested in just

how you are seeing how the covenant works in these as either positive or negative.

IOW is it Gods power which corrupts? The power He gives them, taking it back to the scripture written by JS when he stated that give a man a little power etc.

Or with the Good Samaritan. Was it an example of those who were covenanted not fulfilling their covenant but the one who wasn't fulfilled it and thereby became covenanted--- or--- was the Samaritan the one who was covenanted somehow in the pre-existence and fulfilling it, while others who had been covenanted maybe by word and deed, but not spiritually covenanted from the beginning? or was but didn't live up to it spiritually speaking?

As you can see there are many ways to go here and I would appreciate you nailing it down for me from your point of view.

If you could start your last post over and expound upon each and every thing as it pertains to the covenant.

Thanks.

I am sorry I have not the time to respond to all you have asked. Your questions are deep, as I would hope they would be. I will respond when I have more time - in the meantime I believe it is more important to be able to ask good questions than it is to be able to offer answers.

The Traveler

[Guest Syble]

Thanks. When you get the time. :)

[Traveler]

Trying to answer the question of covenants related to the parable of the Good Samaritan.

There are several covenant layers that relate and give history. First is the Abraham covenant which is the beginning of the covenant of Israel. This is then overlaid by the covenant of Moses that established Israel as a nation with Prophets/Judges as proctors (G-d’s proxy) of the covenant. This covenant is then modified to the Prophet/King and Prophet proctors of the covenant establishing Israel as a degraded nation under Kings (this change had great impact on the blessings of individuals under the covenant as given in the Book of Mormon). This covenant was broken with the death of Solomon in the division of Israel into Two Kingdoms (beginning of the scattering of Israel – as a result of breaking the kingdom covenant).

The Northern Kingdom broke the lesser covenant of divided kingdoms and was dispersed even more among the Gentiles. In the place of the Northern Kingdom a “pagan” or gentile people that did not know (covenant with) G-d, were established in the “promised land” of the dispersed tribes of Israel. These non-covenant peoples that worship different g-ds feared the G-d of Israel and without Prophet or proctor (or Levite, Priest) attempted to make their own covenants with the G-d of Israel. These people and their corrupt (blasphemous) covenants became know as the Samaritans. They created their own copies of scriptures justifying their corrupt covenant and sacrifices and changed their scriptures concerning Jerusalem and Mt. Herron (pardon my spelling)

Anyway when the Jews returned to Jerusalem from Babylon the Samaritans did not want a temple built and created lots of problems for the Jews. Perhaps the only reason there was not a major war was because the Jews and Samaritans were both subject peoples. The closest comparison of the Samaritans to our time Christians that I can use to demonstrate this divide would be the Anti Christ. That is, the Samaritans were considered of by the Jews what the Christians of today would consider the Anti Christ or followers of the Anti Christ. No Jew would talk to or have any dealing with a Samaritan any more than a Christian would befriend a known follower of the Anti Christ today.

When Jesus taught to love your neighbor as yourself he was asked who qualifies as a neighbor according to the covenant Israel had with G-d. The example he gave is that of a Samaritan in comparison to a Leavitt and Priest. This teaching of loving your neighbor in light of covenants confused and astonished many Jews anciently and is ignored by many Christians today that do not realize the full significances of what he taught based on the symbols he used in relation to covenants. The confusion today is, in light of “Good Samaritan” parable – what identifies a covenant disciple of Christ that loves their neighbor and who is it that is not a covenant disciple of Christ or a breaker of the covenant to love they neighbor (the real Anti Christ)? - The recognized teachers of correct doctrine or the vessels of compassion and love?

The Traveler

[Guest Syble]

Very nicely done Traveler!

So, because one is covenanted much more is expected, yet not always given. Christ was making the point with this parable that those who should be known as the greater compassionate servants aren't always those who are.

Aaaand those who are labeled as uncovenanted and therefore lesser are looked down upon by these covenanted people without a TRUE basis

aaaannnddd are sometimes the ones who live a covenant they really haven't received.

Thus the teaching = by their fruits ye shall know them. Look upon the heart.

If we take the beginning of this discussion about covenants and place it into a working context, we are expected to recognize that just because we are a papered member, doesn't mean we have the right to any of the blessings unless we are living fully up to the covenants one made.f

It also is important to recognize the other side of this, which is those who live higher laws without an actual covenant are looked upon favoriable by God.

There are those who, in the past up to the present, do not understand that the covenant is only valid when endorsed and upheld by faithful, sincere spiritual growth which ultimately must manifest itself in conduct as well as the image of the Lord in one's countenence. If only the actions are displayed without the changed man in evidence (many viewable and many not) then we would have the farsical Pharasee.

This scenario is found in many of Christ's parables as when he exposed the Pharasees through the parable of the two men praying in the temple.

In the end, then, we have Christ trying to tell us to avoid catagorizing each other, limiting each other, due to our covenanted status. Yet, at the same time, giving warning to those who are covenanted that more is expected from them and therefore worse off than those who are uncovenanted for doing the same things and if an uncovenanted living a standard of the covenanted will ultimately come off better than the slothful servant.

IOW the harlot and publican will enter the kingdom of Heaven before the covenanted (if they are not living up to the covenant.)

[Traveler]

Thank you for you consideration. If you will - one more thought. Jesus taught his disciples as the master of covenants. On his last night alive with them he warned them of one that would not prove loyal to their covenants. In the apostles we learn a great thing when all that remained loyal asked, “L-rd is it I”?

Understanding covenants is not so much to perceive others in their covenants but that we may know ourselves.

The Traveler

[Guest Syble]

Thank you for you consideration. If you will - one more thought. Jesus taught his disciples as the master of covenants. On his last night alive with them he warned them of one that would not prove loyal to their covenants. In the apostles we learn a great thing when all that remained loyal asked, “L-rd is it I”?

Understanding covenants is not so much to perceive others in their covenants but that we may know ourselves.

The Traveler

Yes, Mosiah 4:11-12.

[Guest Crazy Horse]

I so throughly enjoy watching discussion. Thank you, you two.

B)