Several verses were brought to me objecting to the new covenant before 31AD.
These are not exhaustive. But I would like to point out the misunderstandings of the gospel before the cross, and I can see how it is easy for someone to come to some of these conclusions, although I believe that you have to ignore a lot of bible in order to believe that the new covenant blessings were not available before 31AD, I’m sure that if you look at this article with care, you will see the serious issues that arise should you believe that the power of the blood of the new covenant was not available before 31AD. And many of the character of God issues you end up with when believing that way.
This article therefore is an effort to help us see His glory and character more clearly, and to recognize the power in the promises of God and the power in the word of God, so that by this we become changed into the same image.
Regarding the blood of Christ, and the power in it. Let me lay out my belief from the beginning. And this is the foundation of everything that will follow. It is a quote from EJ Waggoner:
“Christ is the “Lamb that hath been slain from the foundation of the world.” Rev. xiii. 8, R.V. We are redeemed with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot; who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world.” 1 Pet. ii. 19, 20.
Ever since the foundation of the world, men have had “redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins.” Col. i. 14. It is through “faith in His blood,” that righteousness is declared. Rom. iii. 21, 25. Now “by faith Abel offered unto God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous.” Heb. xi. 4. So we see that “the blood of His cross” was available for righteousness and peace as soon as there was sin in the world. He is the propitiation “for the sins of the whole world,” not merely for a certain age of the world.
But as surely as Christ was slain from the foundation of the world, He was raised from the dead from the foundation of the world; for He saves men by His life. Therefore the “Christian dispensation” began for man as soon, at least, as the fall. There are indeed, two dispensations, a dispensation of sin and death, and a dispensation of righteousness and life, but these two dispensations have run parallel from the fall. God deals with men as individuals, and not as nations, nor according to the century in which they live. No matter what the period of the world’s history, a man can at any time pass from the old dispensation into the new. It is when men know Christ after the Spirit, that “old things are passed away,” and “all things are become new;” but Moses “endured, as seeing Him who is invisible” (Heb. xi. 27), and therefore Moses was in the new dispensation.” {September 7, 1893 EJW, PTUK 356.12}
So before we start, it is clear to me that the blood of the new covenant and the gospel had all the power at the foundation of the world, that it did at Calvary in AD 31. Now let’s examine the common objections to this belief and see if this belief can stand the test of the scriptures.
Objection 1. And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. (Heb 9:15)
Answer: Well, this one is fairly simple. Abraham received “the promise of eternal inheritance”
Heb 6:15 And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise.
He could only have that promise “by means of death” and the blood of “the everlasting covenant”. Jesus was the mediator back there. We are told:
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
Gal 3:20 “Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.” “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” (1 Timothy 2:5)
Jesus being the mediator of the covenant here, was offering them the new covenant at Sinai. Jesus being “the mediator of the new covenant” (Heb 12:24)
Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant(with Abraham), that was confirmed ***before*** of God in Christ, the law, which was ***four hundred and thirty years after***, ***cannot disannul,*** that it should make ***the promise(to Abraham)*** of none effect.
Since the covenant and promise to and with Abraham could not be changed or disannuled then God was not giving them a different covenant. BUT because of their hearts they did not discern how to go to God. “…if there were such a heart in them” (Deu 5:29) They did not accept the covenant God wanted to make with them. They didn’t accept the Abrahamic covenant.
Notice God didn’t make the covenant with them at Sinai that He made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob:
Deu 5:2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
Deu 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.
Two covenants here. One with the “fathers” and one with them. So the covenant at Sinai is different from the one made with Abraham. But we are told that God wanted to give them the Abrahamic covenant.
Exodus 6:3-5 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them. (4) And I have also established my covenant with them…; and I have remembered my covenant.
This covenant was not made with them at Sinai. But this was what God wanted them to recognize. And what Moses was told to give to them. (Exo 6:1-8) Because this is the only covenant that had any power to make one righteous.
“They (Israel) could not hope for the favor of God through a covenant which they had broken (the old covenant); and now, seeing their sinfulness and their need of pardon, they were brought to feel their need of the Saviour revealed in the Abrahamic covenant …Now they were prepared to appreciate the blessings of the new covenant.”(PP 372)
The old covenant had no power to save, cleanse of sin, or make one righteous. They had to look to Christ and live. They needed the blood of the new covenant to change their hearts. And even back at Sinai, the blessings of the new covenant were there for them to take.
“Though this covenant was made with Adam and renewed to Abraham, it could not be ratified until the death of Christ. It had existed by the promise of God since the first intimation of redemption had been given; it had been accepted by faith; yet when ratified by Christ, it is called a new covenant.” (PP 370-371)
Ratified means to establish. It was established on the blood of Christ. However, the blessings of this covenant were not limited to just the time period afte the cross as we shall see. The old covenant only made one tribe of the nation priests. The new covenant was to make them all Kings and priests like Melchisidec. This is what they were offered at Sinai. The entire nation was to be kings and priests Notice:
Exo 19:6 And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel.
They certainly didn’t accept that covenant, yet this was the covenant offered to them. The covenant with Abraham that they should be “possessor of heaven and earth” (Gen 14:19) or “heir of the world” (Rom 4:13)
Objection 2. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: (Heb 9:8).
Answer: Christ alone is “the way” into the “holiest”. As for “the way” not yet being “manifest”. Let us consider the word “manifest” in scripture:
2Ti 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which ***was given*** us in Christ Jesus ***before the world began,***
2Ti 1:10 But ***is now made manifest*** by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:
In other words, the way into the holiest was made “manifest” in 31AD as the bible uses the word. That means it “happened”. However, “made manifest” does not imply that the power of the covenant, grace, or the power of the blood was not visible and available to all since “before the world began”. It clearly was.
The gospel wasn’t recognized however to those who were “blinded” by Satan. Only those who had “faith” or “believe” such as Abraham:
2Co 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
2Co 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them ***which believe not***, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
It wasn’t hid to them that believed or are saved, and accepted the covenant of grace. But most, like today didn’t see that Christ “abolished death” back there… Just as most don’t today because they are as blind to the gospel as most back then.
2Co 3:13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is
****abolished:****
2Co 3:14 But ***their minds were blinded:*** for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
In other words they are and were blind to seeing the gospel and the fact that Christ “abolished death” by the gospel. Some go so far as teaching Christ abolished the law. It is one thing to teach the law is written on stones in an old covenant relationship, and written on the heart in the new covenant relationship. (2 Cor 3:3-6) But it is entirely another thing to say that the law is “abolished” in the New Covenant. A popular teaching today sadly. (See Rom 8:7)
I understand this verse is a tough one, but I pray that you don’t miss what the word “manifest” implies. Because if you think that before the cross, they couldn’t know “the way into the holiest” was “by the blood of Christ” (Heb 10:19) Then they were in big trouble.
Moses by faith was able to speak to God. He “drew nigh by the blood of Christ” (Heb 7:19).
Exo 20:21 And the people stood afar off, and ****Moses drew near**** unto the thick darkness where God was.
It is only by that “way”, the blood of the covenant that any man can ever come “nigh” unto God. No man can come to God by “the law” since “the law” could not make anyone “perfect” (Heb 7:19) To say that Moses drew nigh unto God any other way than “the way” is to devalue the blood and price that was paid at the cross. It is blasphemy.
Objection 3. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted. (Heb 2:17-18).
Answer: His brethren are all that have been “born of spirit” since the world began. That would include Isaac.
Gal 4:29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.
It also includes “Israel”. Esau rejected the birthright. (Heb 12:16) Israel is God’s firstborn, even His son”.(Exo 4:22, Heb 12:22-24) You only become a son of the Father by the new birth, and when you become a son, you become a brother of Jesus Christ. And Jesus Christ was made in all points like his brethren, those that are born of the Holy Spirit. (Matt 1”21)
I know some are teaching you couldn’t be born of spirit until 31AD. That’s not what the bible teaches, and is contrary to the new covenant. Every child who is ever saved, must become a child of “the mother of us all” by “birth” and this is only by being born again, or born of spirit even as Isaac was. (See Gal 4:21-29) This is the new covenant experience.
Gal 4:23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
Gal 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants;
Gal 4:26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
Gal 4:29 But ****as then*** he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, ***even so it is now.****
It is no different today. We’ve also been told that divinity and humanity were not combined until 31AD. Ellen White says divinity and humanity are combined in those who have the Spirit of God. That includes all “sons of God” before the cross.
“Without divine nature, without the influence of the Spirit of God, man cannot work out his own salvation.” {RH, October 25, 1892 par. 4}
“Men may study and try to learn the living words of God, but unless the Holy Spirit shall unite with the human understanding, and the human unite with the divine by becoming partakers of the divine nature, they are blind and cannot see afar off..” {12MR 257.2}
“Divinity and humanity are blended in him who has the spirit of Christ.” (Youth’s Instructor, June 30, 1892 par. 3; also in Sons and Daughters of God, page 24)
To deny that Christ is come in the flesh before 31AD is a serious heresy. (See 1 John 4:2-4) Antichrist. I pray that we might see the seriousness of this issue as it makes the cross of no effect.
So imagine, not being a “partaker of the divine nature” before 31 AD. Everyone would be lost since without you cannot have salvation without being born of spirit.
Objection 4. For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. (Heb 8:3).
Answer: And this is the “offering of the body of Christ once for all” (Heb 10:16) Therefore, the offering was for Abel who was cleansed of all
unrighteousness and was found righteous by faith. (Heb 11:4) It certainly wasn’t the blood of bulls and goats that cleansed him of all sin, (Heb 10:4) since that cannot purge of sin or make anyone righteous. Therefore the power of the blood of that one offering was “the blood of the everlasting covenant” (Heb 13:20)
1Jn 1:7 …the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
Interestingly this offering was good from “the foundation of the world” (Rev 13:8)
“…and the third time he came from the Father, his person could be seen. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and trouble, and shone with benevolence and loveliness, such as words cannot express. He then made known to the angelic host that a way of escape had been made for lost man. He told them that he had been pleading with his Father, and had ****offered***** to give his life a ransom, and take the sentence of death upon himself, that through him man might find pardon.” (1SG 23)
This offering was “ONCE for ALL” as mediator and high priest, he offered this sacrifice once and for all, including for Adam and Eve. He has plead his blood from the beginning, and continues to do so today.
Objection 5. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. (Heb 9:16-17)
Answer: The power is in the blood, yes. Without the death there is no power. But we need to understand something about our Father’s covenant. When God made covenant to Abraham it was from a God who “cannot lie”.(Heb 6:18). The promise included the inheritance. And we are told:
Heb 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
Abraham is included in those “which are called” who would “receive the promise of eternal inheritance”. In Romans we are told about Abraham that:
Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
But we also read in the context that:
Rom 4:17 … he(Abraham) believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
In other words. When he said to Abraham, “This is the way into the most holy” It is “by the death of the testator” that you can “draw nigh unto God”. It was as powerful to him as it is to us, and though it already were done, even though it had yet to happen. So therefore though it wasn’t yet ratified (of force) this does not imply it didn’t have the power in the promise. I know the words “of force” in that verse could easily be misinterpreted to mean there was no power back there. That is a terrible deception that leads to a devaluing of the blood of Christ as is being done by many today.
Let’s examine that:
“Though this covenant was made with Adam and renewed to Abraham, it could not be ratified(of force) until the death of Christ.”(PP 370)
The words “of force” should not be misinterpreted to mean that the power of the cross, or the power of the blood, or the power of the gospel was not given before the cross. All that it refers to with this covenant, is that it was “ratified”, or in other words “confirmed”, “established” or FOUNDED upon. Everything is FOUNDED upon the cross. But the power of it is not subject to one time period, but the power of it is as real to those before the event as it is to those after the event.
The blood of the covenant covers all from “the foundation of the world.” (Rev 13:8)
But we read of Abraham that he was a man of faith.
Gal 3:5 He therefore that ***ministereth to you the Spirit***, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of ***faith?***
Gal 3:6 ***Even as Abraham believed*** God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
In other words, Abraham was a “minister of the spirit”
2Co 3:6 Who also hath made us able **ministers of the new testament;*** not of the letter, but ***of the spirit:*** for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
So therefore the blood of that covenant was as powerful to him in cleansing of all unrighteousness, as it is to us. To deny that is to make God a respector of persons. It is to charge God with ordaining only a covenant of works back there, to charge God with saying you must come to him through the law, rather than “drawing nigh” by “the blood of Christ”. It charges God with saying that some men were actually justified by works of the law, rather than coming to Him by faith.
Objection 6. But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. (Heb 8:6).
Answer: As described above Abraham had this “more excellent ministry” the “ministry of the spirit”. This verse does not imply that the “better promises” were not available before the cross. They were offered at Mount Sinai as already mentioned. But instead of accepting God’s promises, the promise of eternal life, and the inheritance, the Israelites made their own promises, very similar to Abraham with Hagar trying to fulfill the covenant by his own works. Fault was found in that covenant. “For finding fault with them.” (Heb 8:7) Certainly the covenant was faulty, but God didn’t make faulty promises, or give them a faulty covenant:
“Feeling that they were able to establish their own righteousness, they declared, “All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient.” Exodus 24:7. They had witnessed the proclamation of the law in awful majesty, and had trembled with terror before the mount; and yet only a few weeks passed before they broke their covenant with God, and bowed down to worship a graven image. They could not hope for the favor of God through a covenant which they had broken; and now, seeing their sinfulness and their need of pardon, they were brought to feel their need of the Saviour revealed in the Abrahamic covenant and shadowed forth in the sacrificial offerings. Now by faith and love they were bound to God as their deliverer from the bondage of sin. Now they were prepared to appreciate the blessings of the new covenant.”(PP 372)
In other words, they thought that the covenant was “of themselves”(Eph 2:9) But after this they had the more excellent ministry of the spirit. He gave them the new covenant just as he did to Abraham with Sarah there and then, but they thought they could make “better promises” themselves just as Abraham did with Hagar, when the “better promises” could only be from God. The miracle of the birth of the spirit was not something that could be produced by man. Instead Fault was found with them, and their worse promises. And their worse covenant could not save them.
Better Ministry: All that the Lord has said He will do.
Worse Ministry” All that the Lord has said WE will do.
Deu 5:2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.
Deu 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.
They could only find “hope” in the new covenant, since the blood in that covenant is a “better hope” than trying to find salvation through the law or works when “the law can make nothing perfect” (Heb 7:19) They needed to “look” and live” “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:” (John 3:14)
God could only offer them the blood of His son. He could not force them into this covenant.
Objection 7. But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. (Heb 9:11-12).
Answer: The Tabernacle and its furniture and everything God showed them was a parable of the work of Christ. This does not imply that they had to depend on the blood of goats to purge the conscience of sin until AD 31, or even AD 1844. It had the power to do for Abraham back then, what it will do today. The life is in the blood, and the spirit is life. And the power of the spirit was had only by the preaching of the gospel to Abraham, (Gal 3:8) and even to Israel in the wilderness by means of those types and shadows.
It was not “you must do this(be circumcised, sacrifice animals) to be saved”. It was “You must believe that God’s word has power to create in you a clean heart to be saved”, to circumcise your heart, and give you the power of the blood of the cross of Christ. Sadly there are many teachers teaching this false gospel right now, that God ordained such a system back there without the power of the cross. I pray they might come to see the goodness of God, rather than viewing and portraying Him as such a tyrant as that.
But with all that, the gospel in those types and shadows given to Israel pointed to a reality that they could experience even back there so much so that it was the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believed and entered His rest. (Heb :4:2, Rom 1:16)
The power was there because the preaching of the gospel is the preaching of the cross, therefore since the gospel was preached to them, this implies the cross was preached unto them.
1Co 1:18... For the preaching of the cross… is the power of God.
Rom 1:16 ...the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth…
To deny that the reality of these things could be experienced back then is to teach that God ordained only a system of works back there without the power. Sadly this is what is being taught.
Objection 8. And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. (1Cor 15:17-18)
Answer: And this verse only proves that there faith was vain back there if they couldn’t believe that Christ was raised from the dead and accept the power of that resurrection back there. But Isaiah saw it when God spoke it to Him as did many. (See Isaiah 53) And when the word was given to Eve that Jesus would bruise his head they “believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.” (Rom 4:17)
And by faith they experienced the power of God unto salvation 4000 years before the event took place. Since the power of God is the cross, and the gospel and they had it.
Objection 9. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. (John 1:17)
Answer: Consider the following verses:
“The word was full of grace and truth” (John 1:14)
“In the beginning was the word” (John 1:1)
So grace and truth is from “the beginning”, since Christ is “full of grace and truth” and he is from “the beginning”.
“The covenant of grace was first made with man in Eden” (PP 370)
Therefore grace and truth came first, because the word was given to them in Eden, then the law was given to Moses.
Objection 10. The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. (Luke 16:16)
Answer: There were more prophets after John. Just like there is still a law after John. The kingdom of God has been preached before John as well.
Luk 9:2 And he sent them to ***preach the kingdom of God***, and to heal the sick.
So what did they do:
Luk_9:6 And they departed, and went through the towns, ***preaching the gospel***, and healing every where.
Notice that “Preaching the kingdom” is “preaching the gospel.”
Since preaching the kingdom is preaching the gospel, then Israel had the kingdom preached to them.
Heb 4:2 For ***unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them:*** but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
God preached the kingdom of God to Abraham:
Gal 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, ***preached before the gospel unto Abraham***, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
So to preach the gospel to Abraham is to preach the kingdom of God to Abraham. That implies that the kingdom of God was preached even before John the baptist. Praise the Lord for that.
The words “until” and “since” do not limit the duration to which the kingdom of God has been “preached”. Nor does it limit the duration of time that law and prophets are to exist. To believe that it does is to deny that the gospel and its power were given before AD31.
Objection 11. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. (Heb 7:19)
Answer: Amen, it certainly could never make a man perfect. Only the blood of the everlasting covenant could ever do that, the “better hope”, And that “better hope” again was had by Abraham, not just in type or figure, but rather, he had the reality of those figures, we read in Chapter 6 of the same book:
(Hebrews 6:13-19) For when God made promise to Abraham…willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon ***the hope*** set before us: Which ***hope*** we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;
And this “hope” was as much Abraham’s “hope” as ours. Since the law surely couldn’t make him perfect, or Moses perfect. It was only the blood of Christ that could cleanse him of all unrighteousness, just as it did for Abel who was found righteous by faith. (Heb 11:4).
Moses also experienced the reality of the “better hope”, by this hope we can enter “within the veil” (Heb 6:19) the blood by which Moses was able to “draw nigh unto God” (Heb 7:19)
Exo_20:21 And the people stood afar off, and Moses ****drew near*** unto the thick darkness where God was.
Noticed that he “drew near”. How? By “the blood of Christ”.
Heb 7:19 For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we (including Moses and Abraham) draw nigh unto God.
He certainly wasn’t purged of all sin by a “worse hope”, or “worse sacrifices” or a “worse covenant”.
Objection 12. Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. (Matt 11:11)
Answer: John certainly was called the greatest of prophets… But as for the Kingdom of heaven, he that is least in heaven, is greater than John. I don’t see a problem here.
Most of these verses are fairly simple to understand, though I can see some of these verses take a little more study to understand since some of the translators had preconceived ideas on the covenants. I highly recommend to everyone the book. “The Everlasting Covenant” by EJ Waggoner. It will erase a lot of these misunderstandings from your minds and give you a clearer view of righteousness by faith.
These verses are sadly being used by some to teach “another gospel”. May Father find you experiencing the power of the reality of the blood of the everlasting covenant. Our examples of faith are being taken away by men teaching this other gospel.
1 Corinthians 10:11-12 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.
May we not cast away these great examples of righteousness by faith, and truly draw nigh unto God by the blood of the everlasting covenant, our blessed hope, our better hope, God circumcising the heart, and we becoming children of the mother of us all by accepting the spirit of God, the same spirit which in them did testify beforehand of these very things, the testimony of Jesus Christ, which those who had the spirit did have.
