The New Covenant is not a Renewed Covenant

Strange things creep in once we leave Babylonian Christianity. Face it, we are vulnerable. When we throw off the errors, it’s very easy to go too far. I’ve done it myself but on different subjects. This message is about the odd concept of a “renewed covenant”. This is language that some in the HRM started using about ten years ago. The problem they were trying to solve is real – the phrase New Covenant is very often misused by lawless Christians. The lawless ones have hitched their doctrines to the phrase “new covenant” to make it seem like Yeshua ended the law. Well, He didn’t do that. He changed the law and ushered in the New Covenant. The fact that the lawless ones misuse words and concepts doesn’t mean we need to compensate or surrender theological territory.

As an attempt to put distance between the proper faith, one of Torah plus Yeshua, some people made some convincing arguments that the New Covenant is really a “renewed Covenant”. This is ridiculous and there is no hint of this language in any of the New Testament. Unfortunately, people convinced themselves of this so much that this language may even show up in Sacred Name bibles, which is remarkably ironic. A movement that started by undoing age-old errors has come full circle, introducing their own new, Hebrew sounding errors.

I used to spend a lot of time “playing whack-a-mole” with these strange teachings when our assembly was called Hebrew Roots. I’ve tried to get away from that because by giving these ideas attention, they tend to grow. Just like how YHVH told Adam to not eat from that tree, and Adam told Eve, the forbidden fruit just looks so tasty. I also don’t like addressing these things because, well, people who haven’t heard of them are better off. But circumstances have come up that this needs to be addressed.

Before proving this through word studies, we do need to take a Romans 1 approach – the helicopter view. This ministry is called First Century Christianity, after all. And that’s what we strive to reproduce – the pure faith of the first believers. Paul wrote in Romans 1 that Creation testifies so the people are without excuse. From a helicopter view do we see a new or a renewed covenant with the actions of the Apostles? Did the Apostles mandate circumcision and instruct all the converts in the diaspora to pilgrimage to the Temple? No. They did not do this. The Ruach ha Kodesh made converts of Gentiles and Jews throughout the Roman Empire and to the East who all stayed put. They did something different. They accepted Yeshua as the Messiah and either continued to attend synagogue or started to, depending on the convert, wherever they were. This is not how people converted under the Old Covenant. From a big picture, it’s obvious as the nose on our faces the covenant was not a continuation of the Old but something different. We don’t need word studies to know this one is false. But some will, so here we go.

The danger of the “renewed” covenant is that it starts a fissure. People begin to have dangerous thoughts like “well, there’s nothing new in the NT”. This is not true in the least, but that thought leads to the rejection of Paul. Then they reject the Messiah. Then they become pseudo-Jews. You probably know people who have done this. Now, who wants us to reject Yeshua, brothers and sisters? Where does doctrine that separates us from the salvation offered at the cross come from? I think you know.