Covenants UN-conditional or conditional ?

We see that the Mosiac Covenant was nailed to the Cross in Col 2:14-17. So to me that was a conditional Covenant given to Israel and was Conditioned on Israel's obedience .

But there 4 Covenants that are un -CONITIONAL ;

1) THE Palestinian Covenant in Duet chapters 28 and 29 because it has to do with the land of Palestine
2) The Davidic Covenant 2 SAM 7:4-17
3) The New Covenant in Jer 31:31-34 ; Ezek 11:19-20 ; 36:23-38
4) And of course the Abrahamic Covenant which governs Israel in the Past and in the future .
5) These Covenants are ALL unconditional .

6) So those so-called Covenants of Grace and Covenant of works, are they conditional or are they UN-coditional ?

7) If they are UN-conditional , that means that they are still in effect, and if so POINT to it.

8) And if conditional , then they are GONE , like the Mosaic Law .

9) The Abrahamic Covenant was set aside in Acts 28:28

10) Will the Covenant of works and the Covenant of Grace please stand up so I can see YOU .

We must pay the most careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we
do not drift away. For since the message spoken through angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?

kal v'homer arguments only hold up if both sides of the equation are true.

what is the message spoken through angels - it is Torah, of which Jesus said would not pass away until everything is complete... so far there are a host of yet to be fulfilled OT prophecies, therefore only certain aspects have been completed so far, ergo, the law is still in effect (unless you can tell me the date it became COMPLETELY obsolete.)


Steve

God never breaks His covenant......men do. In fact, the Bible is re-pleat with stories of blessings and curses falling upon those that either keep or break their word with God.

dan p said:

We see that the Mosiac Covenant was nailed to the Cross in Col 2:14-17. So to me that was a conditional Covenant given to Israel and was Conditioned on Israel's obedience .

Click to expand...

That would be a fulfillment under Christ, not an abrogation.

dan p said:

But there 4 Covenants that are un -CONITIONAL

Click to expand...

Not exactly. Deuteronomic covenant has conditions for dwelling in the land, that is, for receiving the benefits of the covenant.
Davidic covenant has conditions for following God.
The New Covenant does has a Law that is already inherently fulfilled by the people of the New Covenant. In other words, New Covenant people actually inherently fulfill the conditions of the New Covenant. It's hard to see that as actually conditional.
In your description the Abrahamic covenant has conditional requirements for its practitioners, like circumcision, descendancy from Abraham. Even to NT understanding the Abrahamic covenant is conditional on an individual's faith.

dan p said:

6) So those so-called Covenants of Grace and Covenant of works, are they conditional or are they UN-coditional ?

7) If they are UN-conditional , that means that they are still in effect, and if so POINT to it.

8) And if conditional , then they are GONE , like the Mosaic Law .

Click to expand...

No. In the NT even conditional covenants are in force until they're fulfilled. cf Gal 3:15ff, Mt 5:17ff.

dan p said:

9) The Abrahamic Covenant was set aside in Acts 28:28

Click to expand...

No. According to Paul (Gal 3:15ff) the Abrahamic Covenant is still in force.

dan p said:

10) Will the Covenant of works and the Covenant of Grace please stand up so I can see YOU .

Click to expand...

I don't fully grasp the Two-Covenant idea as the way Scripture organizes covenants, though some of its points are indeed relevant. I still can't throw out the conclusions without re-examining them seriously in Scripture.

These are groups of covenants that operate in a particular way. The relationships Scripture talks about as covenants are conceived as part of, or instances of, or even dispensations of, these unifying covenant themes of works or grace.The New Covenant is the Covenant of Grace. But so is the Abrahamic covenant:Without a law, Abraham operates on grace.

The covenant with Adam is the Covenant of Works. It qualifies as a covenant: the death of the one engaged in satisfying the law; the establishment (and loss by breakage) of the relationship with God.

The Law of Moses is arguable, and seems to straddle the two-covenant concept. Moses has signs that point to Christ. Yet Moses operates on a moral law which would point to the moral justice in the Covenant of Works. Paul solves this knot by pointing out the multiple purposes of God in giving us the Law: to show us that if we attempted to satisfy Him by works, we come out of it, dead. Rom 2-3 point this out. This establishes the Law as being spiritual, right, and just ... but also deadly. The sacrifices of the Law also point out the actual solution -- faith in the One sacrificed for our sins.

Temporal legislation is conditional. Eternal legislation is unconditional.

billwald said:

Temporal legislation is conditional. Eternal legislation is unconditional.

Click to expand...

How might we resolve that with Jesus' statement,